Giving or receiving blood

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
J

jaybird88

Guest
thats pretty scary. makes me want to quote my papaw, "dont call an ambulance for me, just call mccnutt(name of the local funeral home)'
 
May 13, 2017
2,359
27
0
What in the world does an archaic procedure have to do with whether blood transfusions are ok scripturally or not?

Or, are you just trying and failing to be funny?
In my opinion this thread has passed beyond the useful and is now just a time waster.
 

Zen

Senior Member
Sep 11, 2015
752
16
18
O.T. / N.T.
'Do not consume blood, that is where the life is'

If it's so good and healthy, why have people died from it? Why are sodomites transferring diseases through it?
 

Billyd

Senior Member
May 8, 2014
5,048
1,490
113
IMHO. If you fail to donate blood that will save someone's life, you commit murder. If you fail to receive blood that will save your own life, you commit suicide.

I believe that God doesn't approve of either.
 

Zen

Senior Member
Sep 11, 2015
752
16
18
IMHO. If you fail to donate blood that will save someone's life, you commit murder. If you fail to receive blood that will save your own life, you commit suicide.

I believe that God doesn't approve of either.
lol

What if I accepted blood from a sodomite and died of AIDS?

Is that a murder/suicide?
 
M

Miri

Guest
lol

What if I accepted blood from a sodomite and died of AIDS?

Is that a murder/suicide?
What if you got run over by a bus, bled out and died.

What if a straight person gave you aids.

What if you refused brain surgery to remove that tumour and died.

What if you get C Diff in hospital and died.

What if you got septisemia and refused antibiotics and died.

What if you refused vaccines got measles and died.

I know I'm digressing but it's just to make a point that there are a lot of "what ifs"
out there.

We can't live life on "what ifs" each person has to decide what's right for them.
However back to the topic at hand.

If your life is in danger and you need a blood transfusion there are 3 basic
options.

1) Have a blood transfusion, risk very very very minimal chance of catching something.
2) Die because you refuse it.
3) Refuse it and have sufficient faith and strength in God to believe, trust and ask for
a miracle. (Not many do by the way).

Which would you pick? It's that simple.

Or how about the above scenario but picture yourself as a parent with young children
who depend on you etc. Does that change the priorities.

I know a few people over the years who have had blood transfusions each has been
perfectly fine. One was a lovely Christian lady who had a problem with low
platelet levels. She had loads of transfusions over a year long period.
without them she would be dead. She has since recovered and gone on to
start a woman's prayer ministry in the church and has since helped many.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
M

Miri

Guest
Just wanted to as well, that Christians should be very wary about
refusing medical help and treatment unless they get a very clear
unction/word from God. Not just their own conscious thoughts.

They should also not make that decision in advance, but it should be under
the guidance of the Holy Spirit actually in that situation.

God has given us the blessing of medicine and it is a blessing!
Look at the hundreds of thousands who die unnecessarily in third world
countries for lack of knowledge.

But back to the thingy about not refusing medical treatment unless there is a
very clear word from God. I've done this twice myself, my life was not at risk, although
more harm would have occurred if I had got it wrong. Those decisions were made
after much prayer and the unequivocal unction or the Holy Spirit. One instance was
also confirmed by another party who got a word from God.

It wasn't based on previous debates in a thread, or principles, or individual view points.
They was a clear word from God in very specific situations.

Each time it was right to refuse treatment. But that doesn't mean it would be right to
refuse it again. Each situation needs prayful consideration and I would say that in most
circumstances, it is absolutely right to accept medical treatment.

To anyone who may be influenced by this thread to refuse a blood transfusion in the future,
ignore this advice. That kind of advice can get you killed!

The default has got to be to accept treatment, unless God very clearly shows you otherwise
in the middle of the situation.
Thats God tells you that, not that you tell yourself that. Even then, pray, pray and pray!
 
J

jaybird88

Guest
Jesus and the 12 said bring the sick to the church elders and lay hands on them, thats what they did back then. today we have small denominations that do exactly that and most of the mainstreamers mock and laugh at them.

makes no sense so many will put so much faith in a doctor they dont know and so little faith in the Lord that created all things.
 
J

Jennie-Mae

Guest
I think it is somewhat problematic that people with a lifestyle that is proven to be hazardous are allowed to give blood.
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,083
1,749
113
The fact that people would actually risk their lives over this it's kind of sad. This is not biblical. It's just superstitious nonsense
God gave Noah meat, but not blood to eat. The apostles said to 'abstain from things strangled and from blood.' Apparently JW's consider having someone else's blood pump into your veins to be along the same lines as drinking blood. It's not superstition. It's a matter of interpretation.
 

gb9

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2011
11,723
6,315
113
God gave Noah meat, but not blood to eat. The apostles said to 'abstain from things strangled and from blood.' Apparently JW's consider having someone else's blood pump into your veins to be along the same lines as drinking blood. It's not superstition. It's a matter of interpretation.
yes, and sadly, that interpretation is wrong...........
 

hornetguy

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2016
6,646
1,396
113
yes, and sadly, that interpretation is wrong...........
Yes.... seeing how blood transfusions were not even possible in those times, it's VERY clear what scripture is talking about. The very common practice of drinking blood.... consuming it....

Now, if a doctor tells me I am supposed to drink a pint of fresh blood every evening for health purposes, I'll refuse.
If a doctor told me that extra-marital sex would "help" my marriage, I would refuse.

We can be, and SHOULD be, discerning about what doctors tell us, and should prayerfully consider any prescribed or proposed treatment of which we are unsure.

But... to refuse good medical practices simply out of superstition, or mis-understood scripture is just silly... and quite possibly deadly.
 
J

jaybird88

Guest
yes, and sadly, that interpretation is wrong...........
how is it wrong. when the Lord says no blood, what exactly you think He is talking about?
 
J

jaybird88

Guest
post #113 answers your question.
not really, guess your saying the no blood referred to in the bible is a different blood than we have today and thats what makes it ok?
 

graceNpeace

Senior Member
Aug 12, 2016
2,180
107
63
not really, guess your saying the no blood referred to in the bible is a different blood than we have today and thats what makes it ok?
You cannot see a difference between eating blood and getting a blood transfusion?
Also, how can that reference include blood transfusions which have only been around a hundred years or so?
 
J

jaybird88

Guest
You cannot see a difference between eating blood and getting a blood transfusion?
Also, how can that reference include blood transfusions which have only been around a hundred years or so?
so when the Most High commands no blood. He is not really talking about the blood in itself but the process of how the blood gets in there?
 

gb9

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2011
11,723
6,315
113
not really, guess your saying the no blood referred to in the bible is a different blood than we have today and thats what makes it ok?
the O.T commands were about the drinking of blood, not about a medical procedure. those commands, which by the way, were only given to Israel, not the whole world, but anyway, those commands were to keep Israel away from pagan practices.
 

graceNpeace

Senior Member
Aug 12, 2016
2,180
107
63
so when the Most High commands no blood. He is not really talking about the blood in itself but the process of how the blood gets in there?
You are paraphrasing, do you realise that?
The prohibition is specifically against the eating or drinking of blood!

Again, do you not see a difference between having blood as part of a meal and a blood transfusion?