Questions From Readers

◼ How strenuously should a Christian resist a blood transfusion that has been ordered or authorized by a court?

Each situation is unique, so there is no all-inclusive rule on this. Christians are known for respectfully ‘paying back to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s,’ obeying the laws of the secular government. Yet, they realize that their overriding obligation is to render “God’s things to God,” not violating his law.​—Mark 12:17.

Romans 13:1-7 discusses the relationship of Christians to the governmental “superior authorities.” Such governments have the authority to enact laws or to issue directions, usually to promote the general welfare of the populace. And governments ‘bear the sword’ to enforce their laws and ‘to express wrath upon the one practicing what is bad according to their laws.’ Being subject to the superior authorities, Christians desire to obey laws and court decrees, but this subjection must be relative. If a Christian is asked to submit to something that would be a violation of God’s higher law, the divine law comes first; it takes precedence.

Some modern laws that are basically good may be misapplied to authorize the forcing of a blood transfusion on a Christian. In this case Christians must take the same stand that the apostle Peter did: “We must obey God as ruler rather than men.”​—Acts 5:29.

Jehovah commanded the Israelites: “Be firmly resolved not to eat the blood, because the blood is the soul and you must not eat the soul with the flesh.” (Deuteronomy 12:23) A Jewish Bible translation of 1917 reads De 12:23: “Only be stedfast in not eating the blood.” And Isaac Leeser rendered the verse De 12:23: “Only be firm so as not to eat the blood.” Does that sound as if God’s servants were to be casual or passive about upholding his law?

With good reason Christians have been absolutely determined to obey God, even if a government directed them otherwise. Professor Robert L. Wilken writes: “Christians not only refused [Roman] military service but they would not accept public office nor assume any responsibility for the governing of the cities.” (The Christians as the Romans Saw Them) Refusal could mean being branded lawbreakers or being condemned to the Roman arena.

Christians today must also be steadfast, firmly resolved not to violate divine law, even if that puts them in some jeopardy as to secular governments. The highest law of the universe​—God’s law—​requires that Christians abstain from blood, just as they are commanded to avoid fornication (sexual immorality). The Bible calls these prohibitions “necessary things.” (Acts 15:19-21, 28, 29) Such divine law is not to be taken lightly, as something to be obeyed only if it is convenient or presents no problems. God’s law must be obeyed!

We can appreciate, then, why the young Christian mentioned on page 17 told a court that “she considered a transfusion an invasion of her body and compared it to rape.” Would any Christian woman, young or old, passively submit to rape, even if there were a legal grant that the fornication by sexual assault be carried out?

Similarly, the 12-year-old quoted on the same page left no doubt that ‘she would fight any court-authorized transfusion with all the strength she could muster, that she would scream and struggle, that she would pull the injecting device out of her arm and would attempt to destroy the blood in the bag over her bed.’ She was firmly resolved to obey the divine law.

Jesus withdrew from the area when a crowd wanted to make him king. Similarly, if a court-authorized transfusion seemed likely, a Christian might choose to avoid being accessible for such a violation of God’s law. (Matthew 10:16; John 6:15) At the same time, a Christian should wisely seek alternative medical treatment, thus making a genuine effort to maintain life and to regain full health.

If a Christian did put forth very strenuous efforts to avoid a violation of God’s law on blood, authorities might consider him a lawbreaker or make him liable to prosecution. If punishment did result, the Christian could view it as suffering for the sake of righteousness. (Compare 1 Peter 2:18-20.) But in most cases, Christians have avoided transfusions and with competent medical care have recovered, so that no lasting legal problems resulted. And most important, they have maintained their integrity to their Divine Life-Giver and Judge.