For centuries Christians have referred to the New Testament for guidance on moral conduct. But did the writers of the New Testament themselves agree on such questions as divorce, political obedience, wealth and the toleration of other religions? And have their often inconsistent views any relevance today?

Jehovah's Witnesses are students of the Bible. They refuse transfusions out of obedience to the scriptural directive to abstain and keep from blood. Dr Muramoto disagrees with the Witnesses' religious beliefs in this regard. Despite this basic disagreement over the meaning of Biblical texts, Muramoto flouts the religious basis for the Witnesses' position. His proposed policy change about accepting transfusions in private not only conflicts with the Witnesses' fundamental beliefs but it promotes hypocrisy. In addition, Muramoto's arguments about pressure to (...) conform and coerced disclosure of private information misrepresent the beliefs and practices of Jehovah's Witnesses and ignore the element of individual conscience. In short, Muramoto resorts to distortion and uncorroborated assertions in his effort to portray a matter of religious faith as a matter of medical ethical debate. (shrink)

John Barton is convinced that in many areas of ethical enquiry the Old Testament has much to teach us, and he argues his case in this new book, which developed out of lectures given both in Canada and in Oxford. During it he looks again at the Ten Commandments; the narrative about David and his children; the ethical issues of ecology, sexual morality and property; human morality as the express command of God; and the motivation for moral conduct. By the (...) end of the book it is clear that although the Old Testament comes to us from a remote, alien and apparently unsophisticated context, the powerful minds who worked on its books still have things to say which remain evocative and suggestive for our own moral enquiries. (shrink)

Only six men have written a major work on Old Testament ethics in the last hundred years, and only two of these works, both written before 1900, are in English.

Background and Purpose Stroke represents one of the most important causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Innovative systems biology-based approach is likely to increase the understanding of the underpinning of acute stroke promise to enhance stroke prevention, acute treatment, and neurorehabilitation. Recent growing body of evidence with shared pathobiology with COVID-19 and the critically important role of inflammation in the context of stroke points to far-reaching consequences of acute stroke, just as in the case of COVID-19. So far, stroke typically (...) defined by late-appearing disease manifestation by the range of stroke subtypes as defined by the WHO or American Stroke Association. This definition neglects the underlying pathobiological mechanisms such as low-grade chronic inflammation and already compromised vascular system. Diseases such as stroke is hardly a simple result of a single problem, but rather a complex cascade of pathobiological processes and interactions in a complex biochemical environment. The evidence of changes in innate immunity and adaptive immunity during the index event of acute stroke and recovery over next 3-12 months can be easily elicited with simple bedside blood tests such as neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio with well over 300 published papers including several systematic reviews and meta-analyses confirming this. Global standard operating procedures of stroke care dictated by the national and international stroke guidelines at present. It is imperative to explore the evidence of systems biology approach in current stroke guidelines. This is likely to be a key turning point in managing stroke across the continuum. Methods We systematically searched for guideline recommendation on the day-to-day use of peripheral inflammatory markers such as NLR published in the English language between January 1, 2005, and December 2020. Any other evidence of systems biology-based approach or recommendation was explored within the selected guidelines for this scoping review. Only the latest guideline per writing group was selected. Each guideline was analyzed independently by 2 to 4 authors to determine clinical scenarios explained/given, scientific evidence used, and recommendations presented in the context of systems biology. Results The scoping review found 3,830 titles with 119 guidelines from 46 countries included for this review. Stroke-related organizations wrote Sixty-five per cent of the guidelines while national ministries wrote a fewer number of guidelines. We were primarily interested in recommendations for acute management in AIS published in the English language. Fifteen eligible guidelines were identified from 15 different countries/regions. None of the guidelines recommended the routine use of peripheral markers of inflammation, such as NLR, among their acute assessment and management recommendations. None of the existing guidelines explored the systems biology approach to one of the most complex diseases affecting the human brain, stroke. Conclusions This systematic review has identified a significant evidence-practice gap in all existing national stroke guidelines published in English medium as of October 2020. These guidelines included the only current “living stroke guidelines, Stroke Guidelines from Australia with a real opportunity to modernize the living stroke guidelines with systems biology approach and provide 2020 vision towards better stroke care globally. Investigation of complex disease such as stroke is best served through a systems biology approach. One of the easiest places to start is simple blood tests such as total white cell count and NLR. Systems biology approach point us towards simple tools such immune-inflammatory index, Sunshine Prognostic Score which should pave the way for the stroke physician community address the challenges in systems biology approach in stroke care. These challenges include translating bench research to the bedside, managing big data. Working with an interdisciplinary team is also provide a distinct advantage. (shrink)

This definitive study looks at the task of interpreting Scripture by exploring four broad models for understanding Scripture, namely, "witnessing tradition," "authoritative canon," "inspired word," and "experienced revelation." The diversity of interpretive approaches implied by the use of these four models is carried further by a methodological catholicity and openness within each of the four major divisions of the book. For instance, in dealing with the interpretation of scriptural narrative, Goldingay carefully explains how literary approaches to Scripture and a concern (...) for the history narrated in the Bible's stories can be held together with other interpretive focuses. In his discussions of differing approaches and focuses in interpretation, Goldingay is impressively clear and informative and demonstrates a sophisticated ability to respond to and challenge what other scholars have written. Throughout this volume, Goldingay continually moves toward the interpreter's final task-communication to others of what has been gained in interpretation. He asks, for example, what are the implications of the different interpretive strategies for Christian life, human liberation, preaching and Christian community life. He demonstrates his conclusions with numerous examples of interpretation-his own and those of others-of specific Bible passages. JOHN GOLDINGAY is David Allan Hubbard Professor of Old Testament at Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California. He is the author of numerous scholarly books and commentaries on Daniel (Word Biblical Commentary) and Isaiah (New International Biblical Commentary). He has also written several more popular expositions such as After Eating the Apricot and Men Behaving Badly. (shrink)

This book puts forward a controversial argument which has not been countered in the decade since it first appeared. Underlying its approach la the view that the New Testament may be of less relevance to the modem world than is commonly supposed. The ethical perspective of Jesus, Professor Sanders argues, is so Inescapably linked to his expectation of the imminent coming of the kingdom of God that the two cannot be separated. Paul shares Jesus' expectation of an imminent end, and (...) consequently makes frequent use of arbitrary divine pronouncements, and so on. Professor Sanders makes it quite clear that the years have not made him change his mind over essentials. Of course, scholarship has moved on. but, 'If I were revising the present work I would still continue to hold that Jesus provides no guide for ethics today, that Paul's ethics are equally eschatotogically orientated, except for his brief glimpse of the transcendence of love; and also that John's simple ethics are intended to be valid only in the church, not generally. I would also still maintain that James offers more promise for providing a continuing Christian ethical base than do the other New Testament writers, for it is James who best points beyond the disappointment of eschatological hopes to the real world and to everyday problems.' Controversial this thesis may be, but there is much to be said for it and it cannot be pushed aside. Jack T. Sanders was Professor of Religious Studies In the University of Oregon. (shrink)

Of growing concern over Jehovah's Witnesses' (JWs) refusal of blood is the intrusion of the religious organisation into its members' personal decision making about medical care. The organisation currently may apply severe religious sanctions to JWs who opt for certain forms of blood-based treatment. While the doctrine may be maintained as the unchangeable "law of God", the autonomy of individual JW patients could still be protected by the organisation modifying its current policy so that it strictly adheres to the right (...) of privacy regarding personal medical information. The author proposes that the controlling religious organisation adopt a "don't-ask-don't-tell" policy, which assures JWs that they would neither be asked nor compelled to reveal personal medical information, either to one another or to the church organisation. This would relieve patients of the fear of breach of medical confidentiality and ensure a truly autonomous decision on blood-based treatments without fear of organisational control or sanction. (shrink)

Most physicians dealing with Jehovah's Witnesses (JWs) who refuse blood-based treatment are uncertain as to any obligation to educate patients where it concerns the JW blood doctrine itself. They often feel they must unquestioningly comply when demands are framed as religiously based. Recent discussion by dissidents and reformers of morally questionable policies by the JW organisation raise ethical dilemmas about "passive" support of this doctrine by some concerned physicians. In this paper, Part 2, I propose that physicians discuss the misinformation (...) and irrationality behind the blood doctrine with the JW patient by raising questions that provide new perspectives. A meeting should be held non-coercively and in strict confidence, and the patient's decision after the meeting should be fully honoured (non-interventional). A rational deliberation based on new information and a new perspective would enable a certain segment of JW patients to make truly informed, autonomous and rational decisions. (shrink)

Jehovah's Witnesses' (JWs) refusal of blood transfusions has recently gained support in the medical community because of the growing popularity of "no-blood" treatment. Many physicians, particularly so-called "sympathetic doctors", are establishing a close relationship with this religious organization. On the other hand, it is little known that this blood doctrine is being strongly criticized by reform-minded current and former JWs who have expressed conscientious dissent from the organization. Their arguments reveal religious practices that conflict with many physicians' moral standards. They (...) also suggest that a certain segment of "regular" or orthodox JWs may have different attitudes towards the blood doctrine. The author considers these viewpoints and argues that there are ethical flaws in the blood doctrine, and that the medical community should reconsider its supportive position. The usual physician assumption that JWs are acting autonomously and uniformly in refusing blood is seriously questioned. (shrink)

What makes Jehovah's Witnesses tick? What motivates practitioners of medicine? How is benevolent human behaviour to be interpreted? The explanation that fear of censure, mind-control techniques or enlightened self-interest are the real motivators of human conduct is questioned. Those who believe that man was created in "God's image", hold that humanity has the potential to rise above selfishly driven attitudes and actions, and reflect the qualities of love, kindness and justice that separate us from the beasts. A comparison of general (...) medical ethics and disciplines, and those of the Jehovah's Witness community, is made in this context. The easy charge that frequent deaths result from refusal of blood transfusions is examined. The central source of antipathy towards Jehovah's Witnesses, namely the alleged imposition of extreme and even harmful refusal of blood therapy on our children is addressed. Of course, "...few dilemmas are likely to be resolved wisely or satisfactorily by a blinkered adherence to abstract principles alone. Solutions to most cases will be dictated by a combination of factors. The support of medical ethics by Jehovah's Witnesses, and their willingness to share in reasoned and ethical debate, while at the same time holding firm to their religious and conscientious principles are emphasised. (shrink)

Using five different Old Testament stories as paradigms for correct ethical behavior, Waldemar Janzen provides a comprehensive way of understanding the ethical message in the Old Testament. The five models of the good life he uses are the holy life (the priestly paradigm), the wise life (the sapiential or wisdom paradigm), the just life (the royal paradigm), the serving and suffering life (the prophetic paradigm), and the familial paradigm. Janzen demonstrates that all five paradigms are linked because the familial paradigm (...) represents the comprehensive end of all Old Testament ethics. (shrink)

The liberty of the woman is at stake in a sense unique to the human condition and so unique to the law. The mother who carries a child to full term is subject to anxieties, to physical constraints, to pain that only she must bear. That these sacrifices have from the beginning of the human race been endured by woman with a pride that ennobles her in the eyes of others and gives to the infant a bond of love cannot (...) alone be grounds for the State to insist that she make the sacrifice. Her suffering is too intimate and personal for the State to insist, without more, upon its own vision of the woman's role ….For years, Jehovah's Witnesses have posed a challenge to the medical profession. Bound by religious belief to refuse blood and blood products, they can frustrate physicians who, since World War II, have utilized transfusions when indicated in the course of treatment. (shrink)

Jehovah's Witnesses who refuse blood transfusions on religious grounds have long created ethical dilemmas for those in the medical profession trying to serve them. A bioethicist working in a clinical setting explores how one hospital ethics committee grappled with the additional problem of pregnant Jehovah's Witnesses, including the complex interdependence of maternal and fetal rights.