Is It Ok To Consume Food That Has Blood?

[MorningGlory]

19 minutes ago, bopeep1909 said:

Yes,MG I believe those verses that Ezra posted Genesis 9:3-4 is referring to cannibalism not eating a steak that is cooked rare or medium.

After the global flood, God gave Noah permission to eat meat. "Everything that lives and moves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything” (Genesis 9:3). However, God specifies that the “food for you” does not include fellow human beings. People are treated much differently from animals: “Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind” (Genesis 9:6).

http://www.gotquestions.org/cannibalism-Bible.html

Oh...that's just too appalling to even contemplate.  It makes sense though because nearly all humans observe a prohibition against eating each other.  One has to think that it came from SOMEWHERE and isn't something man came up with on his own. 

[Qnts2]

4 hours ago, Teditis said:

I understand what you're saying but my point was that most people just don't go through

the trouble of drawing out excess blood... not back then, in "Biblical times", or now. Besides

the meat is saturated with blood... it's impossible for us not to consume blood whenever we eat meat.

Therefore the Scriptures must be referring to something more specific here since it doesn't mention the caveat

of "to the best of your ability"...

If the animal is butchered in a manner to drain the blood, the meat will not become saturated with blood. 

In biblical times, the children of Israel bothered to draw out excess blood. In modern times, Jewish butchers slaughter in a manner to drain the maximum amount of blood and go through the process of drawing out residual blood which remains.

Having eaten meat butchered to drain the blood and then with the blood drawn out vs. meat from any other grocery store, yes, there is a big difference. And that taste of the meat is different without the blood.

[missmuffet]

24 minutes ago, MorningGlory said:

Oh...that's just too appalling to even contemplate.  It makes sense though because nearly all humans observe a prohibition against eating each other.  One has to think that it came from SOMEWHERE and isn't something man came up with on his own. 

It is a disturbing thought. If you were starving to death and dying would you eat another human being? I do not think I would

[MorningGlory]

24 minutes ago, bopeep1909 said:

It is a disturbing thought. If you were starving to death and dying would you eat another human being? I do not think I would

No, I wouldn't.  I'd rather die of starvation and meet the Lord than do such a thing and spend eternity in the burning lake.

[missmuffet]

4 minutes ago, MorningGlory said:

No, I wouldn't.  I'd rather die of starvation and meet the Lord than do such a thing and spend eternity in the burning lake.

Do you think a person would really go to hell for eating another person if they were starving and dying? It is not the unforgivable sin.

[appy]

Anyone remember the scene in the movie “dances with wolves” in which the lead hunter bends down and cuts a chunk of liver, takes a bite from it and then hands the rest of the chunk of meat to Keven Costner's character. We can assume this action in its day had paganistic ritual meaning. From this scene I can gather that in bible times, this and or similar to it was in practice from old testament times and into the new testament times.

The scene in the movie was rather startling and gross and so I can imagine that the apostles had this view and action in mind. In the movie, the scene left no doubt that the animal's life blood was still in the meat. Certainly a huge contrast between that and what is purchased in the store and then prepared to one's liking. If your that bothered by the possibility of ingesting blood, then boil all your meat, which insures there is no blood left in it.

[Qnts2]

1 hour ago, giggling appy said:

Anyone remember the scene in the movie “dances with wolves” in which the lead hunter bends down and cuts a chunk of liver, takes a bite from it and then hands the rest of the chunk of meat to Keven Costner's character. We can assume this action in its day had paganistic ritual meaning. From this scene I can gather that in bible times, this and or similar to it was in practice from old testament times and into the new testament times.

The scene in the movie was rather startling and gross and so I can imagine that the apostles had this view and action in mind. In the movie, the scene left no doubt that the animal's life blood was still in the meat. Certainly a huge contrast between that and what is purchased in the store and then prepared to one's liking. If your that bothered by the possibility of ingesting blood, then boil all your meat, which insures there is no blood left in it.

I don't boil meat. I bbq, grill meat or salt meat which also removes the remaining blood if the meat is fresh enough and slaughtered to remove the majority of the blood , but if you buy meat from a Kosher meat market, the blood is already removed.

[gdemoss]

Q: Why not drink blood even though we are not under the law but under grace?

A: Gen 4:10 And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground.

There is more to blood than meets the eye.

Gen 4:11 And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand;

If the earth had such a reaction what shall happen to the soul who consumes blood?

Gen 4:12 When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.

It doesn't sound good.

Gen 4:13 And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment is greater than I can bear.

Cain thought it was horrific.  They were not under law either.  This is not about legalism.  This is a case of reaping and sewing.  There are consequences for all actions that we do that have nothing to do with the Old Testament law that are true for all people everywhere.

[OakWood]

6 hours ago, MorningGlory said:

Is it possible that the verse above is a prohibition on eating raw meat?  Or creatures that are still alive? Or worse yet, cannibalism? 

I believe you may be right, but I jump a step further and claim that blood is only blood when it is raw. Once you heat blood up it clots and the proteins coagulate. It is no longer a liquid and is much darker in colour than it was originally.

In short, if you cook something with blood in it there is no longer any blood there,  just amino acids and iron compounds that used to be blood. So it's safe to eat meat that is cooked.

Even partially cooked meat changes blood from what it originally was, and blood itself will oxidise if left in the air for long enough. So even raw blood eventually clots and turns black and solid if you leave it for some time.

So if you're not sure about the blood rule - don't eat fresh, raw meat.

[Qnts2]

8 hours ago, Butero said:

I am not saying you are in sin for eating a steak that is cooked medium, but since you are not God, you are in no position to say in absolute terms how he sees it.  I won't make a bold statement like that, because I can't be absolutely sure.  I don't personally think there is anything wrong with eating your steak medium, though I prefer mine extra well done, but I can't be sure.  I can only tell you how I view it through my eyes because I am not God.  I think the prohibition on eating blood means just that.  It means something more like blood pudding or just drinking blood, but it is possible it could include meat not thoroughly cooked that still has some blood.  The Bible isn't specific enough to come close to making such a claim. 

In my view, the bible is very clear. It says don't eat blood.  Cooking til well done does not work if the meat is over 72 hours from slaughter. If the blood is thoroughly drained at slaughter, and the meat is salted and rinsed to remove residual blood, the meat can be cooked medium, but if you are depending on grilling, well done is best.