Biblical precedent
When an act appears to impinge a law or requirement set forth by God, yet God has not distinctly stated whether that act does or does not actually constitute a trespass of that law or requirement, the biblical precedent is to wait until such time as God settles the matter definitively. We have, for example, the text of Numbers 15:32-36[1]:
In the above case there was a Jewish man engaged in the activity of gathering pieces of wood on the sabbath day. Under the law to which this man was obligated there were several related to the sabbath. The primary sabbath law says “You must not do any work” on the sabbath, including the work of lighting a fire. (Ex. 20:10; 35:2-3) In other words, Jews had to abstain from work on the sabbath. Yet Jews also knew that all activity was not forbidden under the sabbath law. “Work” is a broad term that arguably could be applied to any daily activity. So what activity or activities must Jews have abstained from in order to obey the law to abstain from work on sabbath day?
Faithful god-fearing worshippers under the Jewish law acted wisely by not imposing their own preferential views when God had not distinctly stated one way or another. Even God’s anointed one, Moses, refrained from issuing a decision in such a case. Hence in the case of the Jew gathering pieces of wood these wisely waited on Jehovah to decide the matter, and in the meantime they refrained from cutting off fellowship with the man. It was only after God distinctly stated His decision to his directly inspired appointed man (Moses) that faithful Jews knew the man had disobeyed the law with a result that fellowship with the man was cut off (by stoning under the Mosaic Law). Prior to this act of cutting off fellowship, suspicion was held the man had breached the law, but the faithful refrained from acting on that impression until God cleared it up Himself.
Hence we have biblical precedent for waiting on Jehovah. Concisely put, to wait on Jehovah is to refrain from imposing a particular position as God's when it has “not been distinctly stated what should be done” by God.—(Num. 15:34)
Plucking vegetation
Leadership among the Jews did not always wait on Jehovah as they should have. On one occasion disciples of Jesus were observed plucking heads of grain to eat. In response Jewish religious leaders condemned the men as sabbath breakers. (Matt. 12:1-8) Those religious leaders transposed their own preferential view onto the sabbath law and then imposed that view as though God’s. Jesus pointed to biblical precedents showing the spirit of Jehovah’s law—which spirit those religious leaders misrepresented in their condemnation. Jesus neither broke the sabbath law nor did he condone breaking the sabbath law. Accordingly, those Jewish leaders had wrongly condemned Jesus’ disciples as sabbath breakers, and this was a result of concluding a matter that God had not distinctly stated. In other words, those religious leaders failed to properly wait on Jehovah.
Watchtower and blood
The Apostolic Decree of Acts Chapter 15 includes a requirement that Christians abstain from blood, yet this decree does not contain language distinguishing what blood must be abstained from or what abstention from that blood is required. Based on this decree, Watchtower’s blood doctrine requires Jehovah’s Witnesses to cut off fellowship with believers who conscientiously accept transfusion of platelets from blood.[2-3] The same doctrine requires Jehovah’s Witnesses to respect the decision of fellow members who conscientiously accept transfusion of, for example, cryoprecipitate from blood, and accordingly to not cut them off from fellowship for doing so.
Waiting on Jehovah?
Based on the biblical precedent of waiting on Jehovah when He has not distinctly stated His position, the question is where and/or how has God distinctly stated that Christians must cut off fellowship with a fellow believer who accepts transfusion of platelets from blood? To put the question another way, what biblical text gives detail that addresses platelets from blood that does not equally address cryoprecipitate from blood?[ 4]
The biblical precedent of waiting on Jehovah would have Christians refrain from imposing a particular position as God's when it has “not been distinctly stated what should be done” by God.
The written word of God records times when individuals were gifted with supernatural divine inspiration to distinctively state God’s will that was not otherwise already distinctive. Watchtower teaches that none of its teachers have this gift[5]; hence Watchtower is unable to distinguish the will of God on this basis.
Christians today do have God’s written word which is divinely inspired, and we have our god-given brains for sound reasoning. Accordingly, if there is a biblical text available that ‘distinctly states what should be done’ in relation constituents extracted from blood such as platelets, what is that text? If there is no such explicit text yet such a distinction can be soundly deduced premised on biblical expressions that are ‘distinctly stated,’ then what are these texts and how is it that they necessarily apply to blood constituents such as platelets but not necessarily to blood constituents such as cryoprecipitate?
If such a biblical text or sound reason is unavailable then on what basis has Watchtower waited on Jehovah to ‘distinctly state what should be done’? To date this author has seen presentation of no such biblical text or sound reason.
Marvin Shilmer
________________
References:
1. Numbers 15:32-36 as found in the New World Translation published by Watchtower.
2. Media release by Jehovah's Witnesses Public Affairs Office out of Watchtower's headquarters in Brooklyn, New York, dated June 14, 2000.
3. See article Blood Processed Beyond “Those Primary Components”
4. “The Bible does not give details, so a Christian must make his own conscientious decision before God.”—The Watchtower, June 15, 2004 p. 30.
5. “They make no claim of inspiration—only that they are Bible students. Since their comments on the Scriptures are not inspired …”—(The Watchtower, Dec. 15, 1962 p. 762)
0 comments:
Post a Comment