|
Many have heard of the religious group who call themselves
“Jehovah’s Witnesses” and of their objection to getting
blood transfusions. The news stories put them in a sinister light
with the issue of not letting their children have a blood transfusion.
For those who have never thought about the issue, we tend
to think they are wrong on this, as on other doctrines. After all,
isn’t using a medical procedure to save a life acceptable?
We have bought the idea that if the “doctors” have developed
it, it must be the best way, and there isn’t a viable alternative.
This “bill of sale” we have accepted is not only false, it is morally
wrong.
For a quick overview on the issue of getting a blood transfusion,
we start with Noah in Genesis 9:4:
4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof,
shall ye not eat.
After the flood, Noah and his family were charged by God to
not eat blood. This was part of what has been called the Noahic
Covenant. It is binding on all their descendants. Since all
humans were wiped out from the flood, all mankind traces its
lineage back to Noah. That charge applies to every human. We
are forbidden to eat blood.
Jumping to the next stage, we see the full detail of blood issues
given in the Law of Moses. The whole chapter of Leviticus
17 covers this. In short, it told that blood is only for use in proper
sacrifice. If someone killed an animal just for food purposes,
the blood was to be poured out in the dust. That chapter gives
only two options – sacrifice or dust. The dust option is not an
option, it is a command. If you find yourself in the field with a
deer you shot, you had no other option for usage of the blood.
The directions were clear.
Finally, we jump to the New Testament in Acts 15:19-20:
19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which
from among the Gentiles are turned to God. 20 But that we
write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and
from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
From there we see that nothing has changed. The charge to
not consume blood continues.
Many Christians are aware of this. For this reason, along with
others such as revulsion, they won’t eat foods like “blood sausage”
or eat “blood soup”, such as found in foreign cuisines.
Lets look at what the “Jehovah’s Witnesses” have presented
as their objections to receiving a blood transfusion. It is really
simple enough. They say that to receive it into our bodies,
through any means, tube, mouth or needle is to “eat” the blood.
After all, they feed people intravenously. Is this a legitimate
concept? I have to agree with them on this. In fact I have to
take it even further because I’ve looked at the Hebrew the Law
of Moses was written in. There are several startling points that
you will not see in reading an English translation.
The first point I want to look at, is the use of the word
translated “eat”.
Lets start with Leviticus 17:10:
10 And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of
the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner
of blood, I will even set my face against that soul that eateth
blood, and will cut him off from among his people.
The Hebrew word is “ àëì – achal” and has a broad meaning.
It doesn’t only mean to put something in your mouth, chew and
swallow. The word “achal” is used in quite a variety of ways.
Look at the following examples that used that Hebrew word:
35 And there came out a fire from the LORD, and consumed
( àëì ) the two hundred and fifty men that offered
incense. Numbers 16:35 (This speaks of annihilation, notchewing and swallowing.)
1 Open thy doors, O Lebanon, that the fire may devour ( (àëì
thy cedars. Zechariah 11:1 (This speaks of wood used up as fuel,
consumer commodity, not chewing and swallowing.)
15 The sword is without, and the pestilence and the famine
within: he that is in the field shall die with the sword; and he
that is in the city, famine and pestilence shall devour ( (àëì
him. Ezekiel 7:15 (This speaks of destruction and death, not
chewing and swallowing.)
9a For the zeal of thine house hath eaten ( àëì ) me up;...
Psalm 69:9a (This speaks of strong emotion, not chewing
and swallowing.)
The word “achal” is defined in Gesenius as “to eat, devour
and consume”. That describes it very well.
Now think of something like paper towels. You buy them, use
them up and go back to buy more. What happened to the paper
towels? They are a consumer commodity and you consumed
them. In the Hebrew it would be said you “achal”ed them. To
turn anything into a product, which a consumer of some kind
obtains and uses for some end purpose, is to turn that item/
object into a commodity for consuming. That understanding is
what lies behind the Hebrew word we are finding translated as
“eat” in our English Bibles.
If there remained any question as to this applying in Leviticus
chapter 17, we need only pay attention to the limiting
framework of the chapter. It lists two options for blood usage:
sacrifice and pour in the dust. You cannot even say you could
save the blood, turn it into fertilizer and spread it on the dirt
for your crops. That would be turning it into a consumer commodity
and you would be guilty of “achal”ing it. Some dog and
cat foods use the blood in their products. We have seen the dogs
lick up blood in some Old Testament accounts. That is so, but
there is a difference between dogs eating a prey and men, disobeying
God in not pouring the blood into the dust, turning it
into a consumer product, packaging it for pet food and selling it
to the consumer. This is still in violation of Leviticus 17.
For those who say, “We are not under the Old Testament
law,” realize that the ban on blood usage was placed on all mankind
through Noah and was reiterated in the New Testament.
The chapter in Leviticus gives us a full understanding of the
“whys” of the matter.
Where Jehovah’s Witnesses go astray in their understanding
of the use of blood, is in their position of the ban only being on
the use of “whole blood”. In Leviticus 17:10 we saw the King
James translators used the words, “any manner of”. The Hebrew
literally reads, “ ëì – all”. You could take this to say, “all
the blood” with the thought of the complete liquid mixture we
call “blood”. Consider several points here, when this law was
given, do you think they would have had any concept of “dissecting”
blood into separate constituents? The “all” of the text
means not one drop of that liquid mixture is to be “achal”ed.
It does not mean only “whole blood” is forbidden, but all that
which is or has come from blood is forbidden.
When you donate blood, you are not doing some noble thing
in helping to save a life, you are desecrating something God has
specially set aside.
I want you to see something really special in regards to the
“whys”. Look at Leviticus 17:11:
11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it
to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for
it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.
If I were to read that in English, without looking at the Hebrew,
I would assume the word translated “life” came from
the Hebrew word “ çéä – chai”. That refers to the animation of
our mortal bodies. After all, if our blood drains out, our bodies
cease to live. It does seem to make sense the “life” or “chai” is in
the blood. That is, from the natural perspective. God, however
reveals something we could never know by scientific discovery.
He reveals that our soul is in the blood. That word the King
James translators translated as “life” is actually the Hebrew
word, “ ðôùÑ – nephesh, which is the soul”. Those verses are telling
us the soul is in the blood. They go on to tell us God has given
the shedding of the blood of the sacrifice to atone for our souls,
because another soul was shed on our behalf. Not just another
“chai” was lost for our “chai”. You see, if the “chai” only was in
the blood, it could not stand in the place for our “nephesh”. The
significance? If this were not the case, the shedding of blood
could only cover for things temporal, our life here and now and
not for something on the eternal plane, our souls.
God was so strong in His position on the only uses of blood
that we saw, in 17:10, that if anyone “achal”ed blood, God would
set His face against that person to destroy Him from among His
people. This is very serious folks. God is furious at anyone who
is “achal”ing blood!
An atrocity of our day is the major use of blood. This is not
only seen in donating blood or blood transfusions, it is seen in
inoculations, whose sources include blood as well as “antibodies”
derived from blood (remember, that is “achal”ing blood
– it certainly isn’t pouring it on the dust in obedience to what
God commanded to be done). Not to mention the many other
abominations used in inoculations, such as human sources.
To consume sources from other humans is cannibalism, what
an immoral desecration of that which was created in the image
of God!
Blood is used for lab testing. This is using blood in a “consumer”
manner and is out of line with the lawful use of blood.
To say, “it’s for a life-saving medical purpose, it,s justifiable”,
is no different to saying it is justifiable to just drink blood if
we were dying from thirst. This is a foul lie. Ends do not justify
the means.
Blood plasma is also used, which was disobediently extracted
from blood and not obediently poured in the dust. God has provided
for natural ways to accomplish all the healing issues we
may face, if only we would look to Him and use true physicians
whose practice is not founded in the ungodly/forbidden use
of blood. These are accursed people, for we saw how God said
He will set His face against all such misusers of blood. We may
think, “God has not acted yet against these so-called ‘physicians’”,
but look how long some very wicked people have lived.
Be assured, there will be a day of reckoning.
I beseech you now, start to seek God with all your heart. Obey
His directives! As you seek God, He will lead you the way you
need to go to have the health you will need to stay out of the
clutches of these blood using “doctors”. If you really commit
yourself to Him because you want to obey Him, He will take
heed to your surrender and commitment. He will answer the
sincere cry for help to follow and obey Him. Whatever comes,
commit yourselves to obey Him and stay away from accursed
uses of blood.
Under the blood of Jesus Christ,
Darrell Farkas
November 1, 2014
Click Here For The Printable Version
Could the Jews make soap?
This question of soap may seem strange, but it details
an important point that applies to eating and
consuming. To make soup you combine lye and fat. A
chemical process occurs and both the lye and fat are
transformed to make soap. Under Mosaic law, the fat
was not to be “achal”ed. If we take that word at its
broad meaning, not just eating but also to use as a
consumer product, they couldn’t use the fat to make
soap. It is this very issue of fat that helps us to learn
more on this word for eat or “achal”. The Scripture
itself gives the clarification for this. The issue itself
revolved around the sacrifices in both Leviticus 3:16-
17 and 7:23-25. It is the second passage which defines
its limitations on the use of the word “achal” to “eating
- chewing and swallowing, or internal consumption”
only. Read the following:
23 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, Ye
shall eat ( àëì ) no manner of fat, of ox, or of sheep, or
of goat. 24 And the fat of the beast that dieth of itself,
and the fat of that which is torn with beasts, may be
used in any other use: but ye shall in no wise eat ( àëì
- used twice) of it. 25 For whosoever eateth ( àëì ) the
fat of the beast, of which men offer an offering made
by fire unto the LORD, even the soul that eateth (àëì)
it shall be cut off from his people. Leviticus 7:23-25
It is verse 24 which makes it clear that “ – àëì
achal” was being used in the limited meaning of “eating”.
The using for any other use would have allowed
“consumer” use such as in soap making.
What is important to note here, in regards to blood
“consumption”, is that God’s word does not leave us
in a vague quandary of confusion on this understanding.
He uses the word, “achal” then gives enough extra
detail to either expand or restrict the limitations
in its meaning.
We just looked at fat and saw its limitations. We
have, likewise, looked at blood in Leviticus chapter 17
and seen it clearly describe the full parameters in “consumer”
application. It also showed it extended beyond
animals for sacrifice in listing wild game of the field. It
narrowed the options to only two: sacrifice or spilled
in the dirt. It we do anything else, we won’t be doing
what it said we have to do with it. Leviticus chapter 17
leaves us, without question, to hold the position on the
full, unrestricted definition for “achal” of blood.
|
 Free to Copy under Creative Commons BY-NC-ND3.0 License by Darrell Farkas
All quotations are from the King James Version of the Bible
|
|