The LORD’s ban on eating or drinking blood is mandated three times in the Bible. The first prohibition is at Genesis 9:3-4.
“3 Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant. 4 Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.” (Genesis 9:3-4)
This law was given after the flood to Noah and his family, and is part of what is commonly referred to as the Noachian covenant. The prohibition on eating blood was binding on Noah and all of his offspring, which constituted the entire human race.
The second prohibition is at Leviticus 17:13-14. This was part of the Mosaic Law that God had given to the nation of Israel.
“13 So when any man from the sons of Israel, or from the aliens who sojourn among them, in hunting catches a beast or a bird which may be eaten, he shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth. 14 For as for the life of all flesh, its blood is identified with its life. Therefore I said to the sons of Israel, ‘You are not to eat the blood of any flesh, for the life of all flesh is its blood; whoever eats it shall be cut off.’” (See Leviticus 17:10-12 & 13-14)
Leviticus 19:26 states: “You shall not eat anything with the blood, nor practice divination or soothsaying.”
Commenting on Leviticus 17:11-12, M’Clintock and Strong’s Cyclopedia, Volume q, page 834, reads: “This strict injunction not only applied to the Israelites, but even to the strangers residing among them. The penalty assigned to its transgression was the being ‘cut off from the people,’ by which the punishment of death appears to be intended (compare Hebrews 10:28), although it is difficult to ascertain whether it was inflicted by the sword or stoning.”
Once again, in legal terms, the ingestion of blood is prohibited. Note, that strict guidelines were given to properly bleed the animals. The penalty for eating blood was being cut off from the people, which some scholars conclude meant death.
The third prohibition on eating or drinking blood was given to the first century Christian church, and is found at Acts 15:19-20 and Acts 15:28-29.
“19 Therefore it is my judgment that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles, 20 but that we write to them that they abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood.” (Acts 15:19-20)
“28 For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these essentials: 29 that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication; if you keep yourselves free from such things, you will do well. Farewell.” (Acts 15:28-29)
The above decrees were legislated by the only major synod (or assembly), recorded in the history of the early church. At this ecclesiastical gathering, all of the apostles and church elders convened in Jerusalem. Under the direction of the Holy Spirit, they issued the above decrees to both Gentile and Jewish believers. This included the command to abstain from blood. Note the following decrees:
1. To abstain from things sacrificed to idols.
2. To abstain from blood.
3. To abstain from things strangled.
4. To abstain from fornication.
If fellow believers did these things, they would do well. This letter was sent out to all the Gentile churches.
The Early Christian View Of Blood
Early church historical documents testify that the early Christians refused to eat or drink blood. Early Christians respected this scriptural injunction, even when efforts were made by judges in Rome to force them to break it. Tertullian, a Christian theologian and apologist of the second century, spoke out against these efforts to get Christians to compromise:
“We do not include even animal’s blood in our natural diet. We abstain on that account from things strangled or that die of themselves, that we may not in any way be polluted by blood, even if it is buried in the meat. Finally, when you are testing Christians, you offer them sausages full of blood; you are thoroughly well aware, of course, that among them it is forbidden; but you want to make them transgress.”
Even as late as the year 392 CE, a religious council in Constantinople (the Synod of Troullos) prohibited the eating of any food made of blood, on pain of excommunication for the layman, and of unfrocking for a priest.
The practice of drinking human blood, which was prevalent in ancient times, was especially repugnant to Christians.
M’Clintock & Strong’s Cyclopedia, Volume I, page 834, observes: “So far were they from drinking human blood, it was unlawful for them to drink the blood even of irrational animals. Numerous testimonies to the same effect are found in after ages.”
The apostolic decree to “abstain from blood,” was long understood as binding. The early Christian Bishop Eusebius tells of a young woman near the end of the second century, who, before dying under torture made the point that Christians:
“ are not allowed to eat the blood even of irrational animals.”
Blood was also used as medicine in Roman times. The naturalist, Pliny (a contemporary of the apostles) and the second-century physician, Aretaeus, refer to human blood as a treatment for epilepsy. The early Christian theologian Tertullian later wrote:
“Consider those who with greedy thirst, at a show in the arena, take the fresh blood of wicked criminals…and carry it off to heal their epilepsy.” He contrasted them with Christians who, “do not even have the blood of animals at [their] meals…at the trials of Christians you offer them sausages filled with blood. You are convinced of course, that [it] is unlawful for them.”
Note the comments of other prominent men and authors on this issue of ingesting blood:
“The precepts hereby set down in a precise and methodical manner [in Acts Chapter 15] are qualified as indispensable, giving the strongest proof that in the apostles’ minds this was not a temporary arrangement, or a provisional measure.” Professor Edouard Reuss – University of Strasbourg.
“God and men view things in very different lights. What appears important in our eye is very often of no account in the estimation of infinite wisdom; and what appears trifling to us is often of very great importance with God. It was so from the beginning.” – An Enquiry Into the Lawfulness of Eating Blood by Alexander Pirie, 1787.
Martin Luther pointed to the implications of the apostolic decree found in Acts Chapter 15:
“Now if we want to have a church that conforms to this council,…we must teach and insist that henceforth no prince, lord, burgher, or peasant eat geese, doe, stag, or pork cooked in blood…and burghers and peasants must abstain especially from red sausage and blood sausage.”
Scientist Joseph Priestley concluded: “The prohibition to eat blood, given to Noah, seems to be obligatory on all his posterity…if we interpret [the] prohibition of the apostles by the practice of the primitive Christians, who can hardly be supposed not to have rightly understood the nature and extent of it, we cannot but conclude, that it was intended to be absolute and perpetual; for blood was not eaten by any Christians for many centuries.”
Consider the following quotes from other sources:
The book, Reasoning from the Scriptures with the Jehovah’s Witnesses by Ron Rhodes, states: “It is understandable why such a dietary regulation would be necessary. After all, some of the pagan nations surrounding Israel had no respect whatsoever for blood. These pagans ate blood on a regular basis. Sometimes they did this as a part of the worship of false gods; at other times they did this because they thought it might bring them supernatural power. In any event, the prohibition against eating blood set Israel apart from such ungodly nations. Evangelical Christians agree that Genesis 9:4 and other such passages prohibit the eating of blood.”
On these points M’Clintock and Strong’s Cyclopedia, Volume I, Page 834, observes: “In the New Testament, instead of there being the least hint intimating that we are freed from the obligations, it is deserving of particular notice that at the very time when the Holy Spirit declares by the apostles [Acts Chapter 15] that the Gentiles are free from the yoke of circumcision, abstinence from blood is explicitly enjoined, and the action thus prohibited is classed with idolatry and fornication.”
Benson’s Commentary Volume I, notes: “It ought to be observed, that this prohibition of eating blood given to Noah and all his posterity, and repeated to the Israelites, in a most solemn manner, under the Mosaic dispensation, has never been revoked, but on the contrary, has been confirmed under the New Testament, [Acts Chapter 15] and thereby made of perpetual obligation.”
Dr. Franz Delitzsch (noted Bible commentator) in agreement with this, says that: “this is not a requirement of the Jewish law to be abolished with it; it is binding on all races of men and was never revoked; there must be a sacred reverence for that principle of life flowing in the blood.”
It is evident from the above historical documents, that the command to abstain from blood was observed by the early church. It is also noteworthy that early Christians, who were on trial for their faith, were tempted by the Romans to eat blood. Early Christians also refrained from the practice of drinking blood, which the pagans engaged in. Obviously, the Romans were aware of the Christian conviction, regarding the sanctity of blood.
There may be those who try to minimize the nature of these divine laws that prohibit the eating or drinking of blood. It is important to note that in most forms of Satanic worship, the eating and drinking of blood is practiced by the participants. This would include both animal and human blood. The eating and drinking of blood is historically documented to have been part of pagan idolatrous ceremonies. Throughout history, the refusal to eat or drink blood has set believers apart from nonbelievers. It is obvious from these Satanic practices, that Satan is fully aware of the sacredness of God’s law, to abstain from blood! His ability to deceive those into eating and drinking blood, is a rank violation of God’s universal law.
As was mentioned above in the many previous references, the Holy Spirit acted in harmony with what had already been mandated by Almighty God, centuries before. This was the covenant that God gave to Noah at Genesis 9:3-4. This covenant was universal and was binding on all of mankind after the flood. The Law of Moses did not invalidate the Noachian covenant which had preceded it. Instead, the Law of Moses reinstated God’s law on blood, which had been given to Noah and his offspring. Thus, in the first century this apostolic council of Christians, under the direction of the Holy Spirit, legislated the same universal law to all Christian believers, to abstain from blood! (Refer to Acts Chapter 15)
Many years later, a letter containing these decrees was still being circulated, and is referred to at Acts 21:25. Nowhere does it indicate that these decrees were temporal or nullified. To the contrary, the apostles’ decisions were still binding on all converts, both Jews and Gentiles alike.
“But concerning the Gentiles who have believed, we wrote, having decided that they should abstain from meat sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from fornication.” (Acts 21:25)
These decrees, that were laid down by the Holy Spirit and the apostles in the first century, are still binding on Christians throughout the world today.