Is it okay for a Christian to eat blood?

  • Thread starter Thread starter souldiver
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

souldiver

Guest
I’m from Philippines, the local dish Dinuguan contain blackened blood sauce, it’s commonly ate here and Catholicism is the dominant religion here.

But in Acts 15: 20, it says: “Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.”.

But all foods are declared clean right?

What should a Christian do? Allow himself to eat blood or not?
 
souldiver said:
I’m from Philippines, the local dish Dinuguan contain blackened blood sauce, it’s commonly ate here and Catholicism is the dominant religion here.

But in Acts 15: 20, it says: “Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.”.

But all foods are declared clean right?

What should a Christian do? Allow himself to eat blood or not?
Click to expand...
Yes you may eat Dinuguan. I do. I also eat the British black pudding (blood sausage).
 
Welcome anyone who is weak in faith,a but not for disputes over opinions.b 2One person believes that one may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables.c 3The one who eats must not despise the one who abstains, and the one who abstains must not pass judgment on the one who eats; for God has welcomed him.d 4Who are you to pass judgment on someone else’s servant? Before his own master he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand.e 5[For] one person considers one day more important than another, while another person considers all days alike.f** Let everyone be fully persuaded in his own mind**.
Click to expand...
This is a quote from Romans 14. To me, it means that those who choose to eat whatever they want are OK with God. On the other hand, those who choose to limit what they eat are also OK with God. 🙂
 
souldiver said:
I’m from Philippines, the local dish Dinuguan contain blackened blood sauce, it’s commonly ate here and Catholicism is the dominant religion here.

But in Acts 15: 20, it says: “Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.”.

But all foods are declared clean right?

What should a Christian do? Allow himself to eat blood or not?
Click to expand...
This passage is an example of an apostle instituting a discipline (except for immoral sexual conduct, which is an enemy of love in of itself)

Disciplines are used to strengthen a soul or to prevent scandal. Christians were told not to eat from food sacrificed to idols because of pagan beliefs intertwining with Christian doctrine. Christians were also accused in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd centuries of being cannibals/blood-drinkers, because of misconstrued rumors of what the Eucharist was.
 
souldiver said:
What should a Christian do? Allow himself to eat blood or not?
Click to expand...
This is actually a great “conundrum” to show to those who adhere to Sola Scriptura.

Catholics, of course, believe that Scripture is not meant to be an encyclopedia, a catechism, a theological manual, or a compilation of eternally-binding canon law. Neither is Scripture something that each individual has to read for himself in order to build Christianity and Christian doctrine from the ground up. Rather, we believe that Scripture is the written component of Sacred Tradition, that Sacred Tradition is preserved by and interpreted by the Magisterium, to whom Christ gave sufficient authority to do so.

With that background, here are two opinions that are consistent with Catholicism regarding this verse:
Ver. 20. Things strangled and from blood. In these prohibitions, the Church indulged the particular feelings of the Jews, that the bond of union between them and the Gentiles might be more closely united; the latter in these two instances giving way to the prejudices of the former, who in their turn gave up much, by submitting to the abolition of the ceremonial law of Moses. This prohibition was of course only temporary, and to cease with the reasons, which gave rise to it. (Menochius) — The Jews had such a horror of blood, that they considered those who eat it as defiled, and violators of the law of nature. The Lord had in effect from the beginning forbidden the use of blood to Noe [Noah], (Genesis ix. 4.) which he likewise reported in the strongest terms in Leviticus viii. 26. By this we see the great authority of God’s Church, and Councils which may make permanent or temporary decrees, such as are fitting for the state of the times or peoples, without any express Scripture at all, and by this authoritative exaction, things become of strict obligation, which previous to it, were in themselves indifferent. (Bristow)
Click to expand...
That is: the Church has the authority to create disciplines for pastoral reasons, and these disciplines are able to be changed by the same authority. This is just like a state which can decide whether its drivers should drive on the left or on the right side of the road, and just as a country can change its laws which once served a purpose, but which are no longer necessary or useful.
 
What is it that the montley Anglicans say: “all may, some should, none must”… according to the law anyway. On the other hand, in many cultures, it is repulsive to eat blood, pork, etc. so it would not be done.
 
You know, its when debates like this come up that I love being a vegetarian. 😛
 
I take my steak medium rare, some blood still in it. Delicious. 😃
 
I ever hear off any one eating blood, as a Catholic we drink the blood that has been concentrated wish is the blood off Christ form the Chalice,s ,but what happen,s in other country,s in the world I can,t say,hope I haven,t offend your religious believes. Amen
 
The Precious Blood is not the same, the accidents of the wine remain.
 
We have to understand where the prohibition against blood comes from and why the Apostles in Jerusalem ordered the Gentile Christians not to consume blood.

There were four rules that Gentiles had to observe if they wanted to live among the Jews.

  1. *]Don’t consume blood
    *]Don’t consume meat sacrificed to idols
    *]Don’t consume meat from strangled animals
    *]No fornication/unlawful marriage

    Judiazers in Syrian Antioch were telling Gentile Christians that they had to obey the Law of Moses, including circumcision, in order to be saved. Gentiles did not want to be circumcised.

    The Apostles upheld the ancient Jewish laws, telling the Judaizers that the gentiles only had to obey these four rules in order to live at peace among the Hebrew Christians. The decision was brilliant. It satisfied the Judiazers because it was straight out of Leviticus and Deuteronomy and backed by 1000 years of Jewish tradtion. It delighted the Gentiles because they did not have to be circumcised.

    This ruling was repeated wherever Hebrew Christians insisted that the Law of Moses applied to Gentile Christians.

    -Tim-
 
“There’s a time for partridge and a time for penance.”
  • St. Teresa of Avila
 
littlestsouls2 said:
“There’s a time for partridge and a time for penance.”
  • St. Teresa of Avila
Click to expand...
Our Lord at the last Supper said, drink off my blood for it, the blood with will be pour out for all, for it is my blood, the blood of every lastingI hope I said it right. God Bless
 
TimothyH said:
We have to understand where the prohibition against blood comes from and why the Apostles in Jerusalem ordered the Gentile Christians not to consume blood.

There were four rules that Gentiles had to observe if they wanted to live among the Jews.

  1. *]Don’t consume blood
    *]Don’t consume meat sacrificed to idols
    *]Don’t consume meat from strangled animals
    *]No fornication/unlawful marriage

    Judiazers in Syrian Antioch were telling Gentile Christians that they had to obey the Law of Moses, including circumcision, in order to be saved. Gentiles did not want to be circumcised.

    The Apostles upheld the ancient Jewish laws, telling the Judaizers that the gentiles only had to obey these four rules in order to live at peace among the Hebrew Christians. The decision was brilliant. It satisfied the Judiazers because it was straight out of Leviticus and Deuteronomy and backed by 1000 years of Jewish tradtion. It delighted the Gentiles because they did not have to be circumcised.

    This ruling was repeated wherever Hebrew Christians insisted that the Law of Moses applied to Gentile Christians.

    -Tim-
Click to expand...

  1. So true in what you said,but I wonder how many understand what your saying?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top