What about the blood? Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

Former Adventist Fellowship Forum » DISCUSSION » What about the blood? « Previous Next »

  Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
  Start New Thread        

Author Message
Registered user
Username: Anewman

Post Number: 90
Registered: 5-2011
Posted on Thursday, January 07, 2016 - 3:53 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

“Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herbs.
Tools specific to Gen 9:4
Gen 9:4
“But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.

My SDA wife seems to think this proves that we are not supposed to eat beef because the blood is not out of it. Can someone help clarify this for me?
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker

Post Number: 15311
Registered: 12-2003

Posted on Friday, January 08, 2016 - 11:13 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Sigh. First, the blood IS out of beef. Meat is sold after being thoroughly drained. The fluid remaining in the meat is just the normal juices that surround the cells. Beef, pork, chicken, etc...all are drained thoroughly. Beef just differs in color; the blood vessels, however, are drained the same way in slaughtered animals.

Second, pagans did overtly drink blood. God established that blood was not to be eaten because it was the symbol of life in animals and man. This fact is related to the fact that Jesus' blood is so significant; God made blood to be the symbol of life; Jesus' shedding His blood (and, incidentally, make a HUGE point in John 6 that unless the people ate His flesh and drank His blood, they could not have eternal life) was a powerful demonstration of His offering the perfect, acceptable sacrifice that restores life to condemned humanity. His blood is the sacrifice of perfect life that propitiates for our sin.

In Acts 15 the prohibition against eating blood was one of the four prohibitions imposed on gentile converts: eat nothing contaminated by idols, no fornication, and eat nothing strangled and no blood. The blood prohibition was one of the "Noahide laws" that applied to Jews and gentiles alike, being put in place after the flood before there were any Jews. Thus, imposing this prohibition both made it possible for Jews and gentiles to eat more comfortably together, but even more important, it prohibited the gentiles from eating blood which would have created echoes of their pagan rituals which included blood-drinking.

Interestingly, the prohibition against anything contaminated by idols was a specific safeguard for the gentiles who had come from idol-worship. In 1 Cor. 8, Paul says that idols are nothing to him, and he can eat anything in the meat market which had been offered to idols because they were nothing to him. Nevertheless, he urged the believers to abstain from eating meat offered to idols in the presence of those who had sensitivities to idols.

It was Jesus who said that what made men unclean was what came out of their hearts, not what went into their mouths (Mark 7:17-23). In the new covenant all foods are declared clean because Jesus declared them so. Moreover, 1 Tim. 4:1-6 says everything is clean if it is received with thanksgiving , sanctified by the word of God and prayer. In fact, it is a doctrine of demons to deny any food.

But back to beef: beef is not strangled. Beef is fully drained, so even if one is squeamish about blood, it is not sold with the blood in it. But in the new covenant, the "food rules", as Paul explains in Romans 14, are not rules about specific foods being intrinsically unholy. Food are permitted as long as one receives them with faith in God. Foods that trigger reactions, fears, and loyalties to false gods or false beliefs are to be avoided, and mature believers are to honor those who cannot eat certain foods because to eat them would remind them of their own false worship practices.

(Interestingly, the Adventist aversion to meat is a sort-of inverse situation: vegetarianism is idolized and has spiritual links to false religion.)

Ultimately, Romans 14:23 is our rule of thumb: "But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith, and whatever is not from faith is sin." At the same time, however, there comes a point in each person's life when he has to be willing to subject his doubts to Scripture. God's truth ultimately must inform our beliefs and our consciences.
Registered user
Username: Ignobleberean

Post Number: 7
Registered: 1-2015
Posted on Friday, January 08, 2016 - 11:25 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Yeah, the pink stuff coming out of beef is myoglobin. Beef just has more than something like chicken meat, so it looks pinker. Otherwise Kosher beef would be an oxymoron.

I would also say that it seems the biblical writers use "blood" metonymically in some places. That is, talking about the shed blood is meant to closely associate the blood with the life which has been taken. Not sure that observation would curry much favor if someone is really hung up on a wooden reading of Genesis 9:4. However, I suppose one could say, well, why does the bible talk about dead people and animals in other places when those dead people or animals still have some blood in them? If blood = life and live things aren't dead, don't they still have their life in them?? Did saul's armor bearer wait until all the blood drained out of saul's body before killing himself (1 Chr 10:4-5)?
Registered user
Username: Chris

Post Number: 1843
Registered: 7-2003

Posted on Friday, January 08, 2016 - 1:56 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Hence one of those odd little things peculiar to SDA culture: those who do eat meat cook it to death. Of course, there's nothing wrong with liking your steak exceedingly well done and your hamburgers dry, it's just odd to have an entire cultural group so uniform in this preference (without even knowing why in most cases).
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker

Post Number: 15316
Registered: 12-2003

Posted on Wednesday, January 13, 2016 - 3:13 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Huh! Interesting, Chris...I never thought it the blood connection with the overcooking of meat. That makes sense!

Registered user
Username: Xenonlion

Post Number: 49
Registered: 11-2014
Posted on Saturday, February 20, 2016 - 5:50 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

That does make sense. Many Adventists do seem to cook meat until its really well done.
Registered user
Username: 1john2v27nlt

Post Number: 560
Registered: 5-2009
Posted on Saturday, February 20, 2016 - 2:03 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I believe the full reason about blood is given in Lev 17:11-12
"For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to YOU to make ATONEMENT for one's life. Therefore I say to the ISRAELITES, NONE OF YOU may eat blood, nor may any foreigner residing among you eat blood." ~~ my emphasis

I have heard the part about the life being in the blood, but I have never heard it related to the ATONEMENT as a reason that it was prohibited.

I have of course been taught that it was a health reason. But then I read a book titled Nutrition & Physical Degeneration which stated that the Masai people lived largely on blood & milk, & had superior health & strength; they are noted runners. This was documented in the 1930s prior to so much modern or western dietary influences. The book cited 14 indigenous, primitive peoples worldwide, from the Inuit in Alaska to the South Seas (Very diverse diets) who at that time had superior health on what we had been taught was unhealthy foods, such as fat (blubber), pork, & sea foods like shrimp etc. That is when I began to realize that the 'food laws' were JUST to set the Israelites apart, & to teach what God wanted.

Understanding the Jew vs Gentile application of the laws in Acts 15, & the Gen 9 COMMAND/Declaration of God, were eye-opening as well.
Registered user
Username: Spudw

Post Number: 139
Registered: 8-2008

Posted on Sunday, July 24, 2016 - 10:10 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I had to laugh about Chris' comment on former SDAs cooking meat to death. That's been me. I've finally started ordering medium well (baby steps, I'll get to medium at some point) when I found out that folks that order well done are a boon to restaurant owners. The chef gets to palm off the absolute worst piece of meat in his possession.
Registered user
Username: Mainexile

Post Number: 217
Registered: 6-2008

Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2016 - 6:01 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Interesting. I never have seen the logic in spending $9-$12 per pound for a good ribeye steak, then cooking it to the point of shoe leather.

In fact, when hosting "those" folks for dinner, I always thaw a cheap sirloin ($1.98 lb) for them. Wasting a good steak, grilled to perfection, is criminal...not to mention a waste of money.
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker

Post Number: 15412
Registered: 12-2003

Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2016 - 6:28 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Now that IS interesting...I've never thought about the "well done" orders being the ones where the bad cuts could be hidden!

Registered user
Username: Colleentinker

Post Number: 15413
Registered: 12-2003

Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2016 - 6:29 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

By the way, Hi, Xenonlion!! :-)

Add Your Message Here
Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Options: Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration