Bible Options Bible Study Software
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Christians don't eat blood and strangled animals
#1
Quote:Acts 15
28, For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;
29, That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

Well often I saw messianics and JFJ's eating and drinking products with blood in it.
So my question is when in history came this commandment in disuse?
And are there nowadays Christians who slaughter properly to get all the blood out, and drink wine where no blood is added to it, or for example 1 colour of the M&M was made out of blood.

I know that some Protestant Christians before Luther existed started to slaughter in their own way, to get the blood out. And also in the same country; the Czech republic somewhere later around the late 1700's I think, the Abrahamites kept strictnesses on their way of kosher food.

But I guess allready very early in history, Christians skipped this commandment. And started to eat/drink blood, and hunted animals etc.
---

Another thing is that symbolically drinking Jesus his blood as a symbol in the wine is also a weird connection with drinking the blood of a sacrifice.

Well I'm curious if anybody knows more history about this issue.
Sei Gesund.
#2
If you read Acts 15, I think you'll find that the gentiles weren't told to obtain from these things because they had to follow the Mosaic/Sinai law.  The Sinai law was a covenant between Israel and G-d, not the goyim.  Yes in the Torah, if gentiles wanted to join the Jewish community, they had to keep the Sinai covenant, but gentiles are not required to join the "Jewish community" today to be in right standing with G-d.  In fact a few gentiles were in right standing with G-d w/o Torah observance (Noah, Abraham, etc) because G-d specially revealed Himself to them.  Read Ephesians 1 and 2 regarding the relationship between Jews and Gentiles in the family of G-d and how G-d has now specially revealed Himself to Jew and Gentile alike through Yeshua.  

I think the reason they were told not to do these particular things you listed was because it was just plain gross and offensive to their Jewish brothers.  We aren't to be unnecessarily offensive to others (Romans 14).  Doesn't that seem to make sense within the context?

Blessings in Messiah!
#3
"I think the reason they were told not to do these particular things you listed was because it was just plain gross and offensive to their Jewish brothers."

Actually the reason is:

Gen 9:4 But flesh with the life thereof, [which is] the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.

That's what is being addressed in Acts:

Act 15:21   For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day. They are saying that the issue has already been settled by Mose. Gentiles already had rules given to them by G-D.

But I suppose that doesn't apply to you either.

Avrahaam
#4
Acts 15:21 states that the command to abstain from those aspects of the Law were that Moses was read in every city, and I believe that implies that the gentile Christians were to avoid being offensive to Jews.  A Torah observant Jew might not mind a gentile Christian crunching on a shrimp or a piece of bacon, but he would be very repulsed by a gentile Christian strangling an animal or eating blood clots.  Since both are supposed to be one in the Messiah, this would cause improper divisions.

When did this go by the wayside?, asks Yetzirah.  Probably when gentile Christians decided that they shouldn't have anything to do with Jewish things or Jewish people, that Jewish Christians should abandon the Torah and stop being Jewish.  Then they don't have to worry about offending Jewish people.  But that is all wrong and it should never have gone by the wayside.
#5
Hi Thirdday.

Indeed I think that Acts is partly for social interaction, but it also states that these are the first/least things Christians could do. So at least around Jews it should be also literally, I guess.
And what do you think, in what time of history it didn't it become gross and offencive to Jews or Muslims.

First of all one of the reasons given of not eating Blood in the bible is because Life is inside of it. This commandment was not given to Jews specifically, but very early in Torah by God. And also the Noachite Laws that were known during Jesus his times, say that no nation should eat strangled animals, even the muslims understood it this way.

Indeed Christians should not follow all Laws that God gave to Israel, but within the MosaicLaw that came from God there are also laws for non-Jews/goyim, you have to read specifically what Law is for who or what, it's not that simple.
Gentiles where NEVER required to join the "Jewish community" to be in right standing with G-d!! I don't know where you get that idea from. There were always non-Jews bringing sacrifices in the Temple or allowed to pray etc. to the same God, without converting to Judaism.

So somewhere in history Christians decided that eating everything was o.k.? So what does it mean, if Christians come to Israel or Brooklyn they shouldn't eat or drink blood?? or if they are in a mixed Jewish-Christian Messianic congregation?

So in Ephesians 1 and 2 I don't read much new things. We don't say that non-Jews are the non-chosen. And in those chapters it's still written to do good deeds (so maybe not eating strangled animals or blood is included).

Still the Samaritans nowadays and Druze people who join the Army in Israel will eat Kosher in the dining Hall, and are not allowed to offend or change the rules there. But in their own room they are allowed to eat what they want I think. It's not a religious state. And if some want to eat pork, that's the goyims business, but blood and strangled animals is not allowed for goyim according to the Laws God gave us. So it's not only about offending, but understanding where (or better from Who) the rules came from, I think.

Be well.
#6
Acts 15:21 states that the command to abstain from those aspects of the Law were that Moses was read in every city, and I believe that implies that the gentile Christians were to avoid being offensive to Jews.  

A Torah observant Jew might not mind a gentile Christian crunching on a shrimp or a piece of bacon, but he would be very repulsed by a gentile Christian strangling an animal or eating blood clots.  Since both are supposed to be one in the Messiah, this would cause improper divisions.


Indeed ThomasDGW.

I think that it shouldn't have gone by the wayside. At least the Samaritans, Muslims and some Christians didn't do so.
It doesn't say in Torah that non-Jews shouldn't eat shrimps or bacon, so that's not the problem or issue.

But like Avraham said, it's allready written in Gen.9:4 way before the Kosher-Laws that were specifically for Jews.
So Christians shouldn't act Jewishly, we never asked that from them, but they should act at least in the way The Almighty wanted Laws for all.
So even a Torah observant ALMIGHTY might be very offended by Christians eating blood cloths or strangled animals. That doesn't mean that a gentile is not a human being anymore or goes to hell or so if he does, but The Almighty asked it, so why shouldn't gentiles listen?

So Gen 9:4 was given before there were allready divisions. It seems that Christians wanted to devide themselves from those Laws. Most Kurdish, Turkish, Arab, Samaritan, Druze or Persian people never devided themselves from staying connected to the original idea. But maybe Christians are to much influenced by liberty etc.

#7
ThomasDGW Wrote:Acts 15:21 states that the command to abstain from those aspects of the Law were that Moses was read in every city, and I believe that implies that the gentile Christians were to avoid being offensive to Jews.  A Torah observant Jew might not mind a gentile Christian crunching on a shrimp or a piece of bacon, but he would be very repulsed by a gentile Christian strangling an animal or eating blood clots.  Since both are supposed to be one in the Messiah, this would cause improper divisions.

When did this go by the wayside?, asks Yetzirah.  Probably when gentile Christians decided that they shouldn't have anything to do with Jewish things or Jewish people, that Jewish Christians should abandon the Torah and stop being Jewish.  Then they don't have to worry about offending Jewish people.  But that is all wrong and it should never have gone by the wayside.

"and I believe that implies that the gentile Christians were to avoid being offensive to Jews."

Believe what you want. It does not make it so.

Avraham
#8
Yetzirah231 Wrote:Another thing is that symbolically drinking Jesus his blood as a symbol in the wine is also a weird connection with drinking the blood of a sacrifice.

Well I'm curious if anybody knows more history about this issue.
Sei Gesund.
First of all Martin Luther is not a good example of Christianity, though he was used by G-d to free the scriptures to all men. He originated of Roman Catholicism that hid the scriptures and used , and twisted them for their own gain, and imagination. Later Luther raised issues of persecuting G-d's chosen Israel. G-d anoints men good and evil, and some a mixture of both throughout the scriptures to bring about His Will.[another topic]  I draw the line on drinking blood. I feel it is against Biblical principles.Yeshua did not literally speak of drinking blood, and eating human flesh, but referred to it in an atoning act for the spiritual sins of man,as the act of sacrifice is spiritual. We all eat and drink the blood of those fallen and died ; Saints and soldiers giving their life for our freedom. Their blood , and flesh is in the ground, saturates into the water supplies, grows with the harvests.becomes dust in the air. We breathe , and drink, and eat the remnant of those who died throughout the ages; as we are but dust as well. G-d gives us two paths to choose; to breath the blood and dust of righteousness, or the blood and dust of evil, the choice is ours!But even beyond this fact; Yeshua speaks not of this earth but of Heaven, for that is where His flesh is; that we may partake of that Kingdom, separated from the corruption of good and evil intermingled in this world, that we may be New in G-d, and that new blood may dwell within us cleansed from sin and death; The blood given; The spiritual blood of G-d;anointing the Holy of Holies; Immanuel. Shalom
#9
Hi Azriel,

You go into different points.

Let me just ask/deal with Luther first. For I don't understand why you mention him. I thought that the Christ and the Roman Catholic Church also discided that the bread is flesh, and wine is blood.
Besides that Luther claimed to be a Hussite in the beginning (the reformation started more than 100 years earlier than Luther), and in Bohemia the Rabbi's allready discided that the Christians didn't do Idol-worship there with the wine, and that trade in wine with Christians was possible, meaning before (Catholics) it was not posible.
Luther might have stayed dogmatic about bread/wine issues?

Later about 10 years before Luther died, Luther wrote against certain Hussites who were according to him a Judaising sect. I don't know what is there maybe written about the giving of wine/bread???

Than, if blood somehow is used in foodproduction (as once for example in the 'artificial'coloring for the blue M&M's sweeties. We don't eat it. But if it is gone through all kind of other processes, as you discribed: earth and than later into gras, that the cow ate etc. we don't consider it blood anymore.

The act for sacrifice is for us spiritual and also literal, He commanded us to bring Sin offerings and others, we didn't interpret it only spiritually. But after the fall of the Temple (years after Jesus died), we don't have a choice, the spiritual part just goes on.
We also have the concept that the New Jerusalem will be on earth, heaven and earth will not be divided as it seems in Christianity to be the case (to me)... The Kingdom will be spiritual AND literal.

Thanks for the reply!
#10
Gen 9:4 But flesh with the life thereof, [which is] the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.

These prohibitions (meats sacrificed to idols, blood, strangled animals) may have been issues for the people of the times of these writings – BUT – today with the food processing methods in use I doubt that there is much danger of partaking of these elements. So, what are we arguing about? I seem to remember seeing a program about an African tribe that in order to feed itself during times of famine would puncture the artery of a cow and drink its blood – I have to admit that I would have difficulty getting into that chow line. I could use some extra info on the above verse, ‘flesh with the life thereof’, is this referring to killing an animal and immediately chowing down on the first available leg (before properly dressing the carcass) OR does a thick slice of rare prime rib of beef satisfy the description? If blood is cooked as part of a meal preparation does it ‘count’ as blood with the life thereof? I know of some cultures that will cook blood in what is called a pudding (blood-pudding) seeing as the blood is cooked there is no longer any life in it. I understand this verse as the prohibition of eating raw flesh with living blood within it – not the prohibition of eating cooked flesh with cooked blood within it. Am I in error?


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)