Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Leviticus 17:10
And whatsoever man [there be] of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people.
10. The prohibition (cp. Lev 17:12) is found also in Lev 3:17, Lev 7:26, Lev 19:26; Deu 12:16; Deu 12:23-24; Deu 15:23. It is regarded as having been obligatory from the beginning (Gen 9:4). The word ‘eat’ is probably used in order to include eating flesh which contained blood. When the people ate thus in their haste after the defeat of the Philistines, this is described as eating ‘with (Heb. upon) the blood’ (1Sa 14:32-34). Cp. ch. Lev 19:26; Eze 33:25.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
The prohibition to eat blood is repeated in seven places in the Pentateuch, but in this passage two distinct grounds are given for the prohibition: first, its own nature as the vital fluid; secondly, its consecration in sacrificial worship.
Lev 17:11
Rather, For the soul of the flesh is in the blood; and I have ordained it for you upon the altar, to make atonement for your souls, for the blood it is which makes atonement by means of the soul. In the Old Testament there are three words relating to the constitution of man;
(a) life as opposed to death Gen 1:20; Deu 30:15;
(b) the soul as distinguished from the body; the individual life either in man or beast, whether united to the body during life, or separated from the body after death (compare Gen 2:7);
(c) the spirit as opposed to the flesh Rom 8:6, and as distinguished from the life of the flesh; the highest element in man; that which, in its true condition, holds communion with God. The soul has its abode in the blood as long as life lasts. In Lev 17:14, the soul is identified with the blood, as it is in Gen 9:4; Deu 12:23. That the blood is rightly thus distinguished from all other constituents of the body is acknowledged by the highest authorities in physiology.
It is the fountain of life (says Harvey), the first to live, and the last to die, and the primary seat of the animal soul; it lives and is nourished of itself, and by no other part of the human body. John Hunter inferred that it is the seat of life, because all the parts of the frame are formed and nourished from it. And if (says he) it has not life previous to this operation, it must then acquire it in the act of forming: for we all give our assent to the existence of life in the parts when once formed. Milne Edwards observes that, if an animal be bled until it falls into a state of syncope, and the further loss of blood is not prevented, all muscular motion quickly ceases, respiration is suspended, the heart pauses from its action, life is no longer manifested by any outward sign, and death soon becomes inevitable; but if, in this state, the blood of another animal of the same species be injected into the veins of the one to all appearance dead, we see with amazement this inanimate body return to life, gaining accessions of vitality with each new quantity of blood that is introduced, eventual beginning to breathe freely, moving with ease, and finally walking as it was wont to do, and recovering completely. More or less distinct traces of the recognition of blood as the vehicle of life are found in Greek and Roman writers. The knowledge of the ancients on the subject may indeed have been based on the mere observation that an animal loses its life when it loses its blood: but it may deepen our sense of the wisdom and significance of the Law of Moses to know that the fact which it sets forth so distinctly and consistently, and in such pregnant connection, is so clearly recognized by modern scientific research.
Lev 17:14
Rather, For the soul of all flesh is its blood with its soul (i. e. its blood and soul together): therefore spake I to the children of Israel, Ye shall not eat the blood of any flesh, for the soul of all flesh is its blood, etc.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
i.e. I will be an enemy to him, and execute vengeance upon him immediately; because such persons probably would do this in private, so as the magistrate could not know nor punish it. See this or the like phrase Lev 20:3; 26:17; Jer 3:12; Eze 14:8.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
10. I will even set my face againstthat soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among hispeopleThe face of God is often used in Scripture to denote Hisanger (Psa 34:16; Rev 6:16;Eze 38:18). The manner in whichGod’s face would be set against such an offender was, that if thecrime were public and known, he was condemned to death; if it weresecret, vengeance would overtake him. (See on Ge9:4). But the practice against which the law is here pointed wasan idolatrous rite. The Zabians, or worshippers of the heavenly host,were accustomed, in sacrificing animals, to pour out the blood andeat a part of the flesh at the place where the blood waspoured out (and sometimes the blood itself) believing that by meansof it, friendship, brotherhood, and familiarity were contractedbetween the worshippers and the deities. They, moreover, supposedthat the blood was very beneficial in obtaining for them a vision ofthe demon during their sleep, and a revelation of future events. Theprohibition against eating blood, viewed in the light of thishistoric commentary and unconnected with the peculiar terms in whichit is expressed, seems to have been levelled against idolatrouspractices, as is still further evident from Eze 33:25;Eze 33:26; 1Co 10:20;1Co 10:21.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And whatsoever man [there be] of the house of Israel,…. That is by birth an Israelite, of every age, sex, or condition, as before:
or of the strangers that sojourn among you; proselytes of righteousness, for the following law was only obligatory on such, and upon Israelites, as appears from its being lawful to give or sell that which dies of itself to a stranger, that is, to a proselyte of the gate, or to an Heathen, De 14:21;
that eateth any manner of blood; that is, as Ben Gersom interprets it, of beasts and birds, concerning which the prohibition only is, according to him; for as for the blood of others there was no obligation, nor were any guilty on account of them; particularly the blood of fishes, and of locusts, or human blood, the blood of a man’s teeth, which a man might swallow without being guilty of the breach of this law g. Some restrain this to the blood of the sacrifices before treated of; but Jarchi observes, lest any should think, because it is said, it is “the blood that maketh the atonement for the soul”: that a man is not guilty only on account of the blood of sanctified things, therefore it is said “any manner of blood”:
I will set my face against that soul that eateth blood; signifying how greatly he should be provoked thereby, how much he should resent it, how exceedingly displeasing it would be to him, and what severity might be expected to be exercised towards him for it; for dreadful it is to have the face of God set against a man, see Ps 34:16. Maimonides h observes, that this form of speech does not occur in any third precept besides these two, concerning idolatry or sacrificing a son to Moloch,
Le 20:3, and eating blood; because eating of blood gives an occasion to one species of idolatry, worshipping of devils, see Le 19:26;
and will cut him off from among his people; which confirms the above sense of the phrase of cutting off as expressive of death by the hand of God; [See comments on Le 17:4].
g Hilchot Maacolot Asurot, c. 6. sect. 1. h Ut supra. (Moreh Nevochim, p. 3. c. 46.)
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
| The Eating of Blood Forbidden. | B. C. 1490. |
10 And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people. 11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul. 12 Therefore I said unto the children of Israel, No soul of you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger that sojourneth among you eat blood. 13 And whatsoever man there be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, which hunteth and catcheth any beast or fowl that may be eaten; he shall even pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust. 14 For it is the life of all flesh; the blood of it is for the life thereof: therefore I said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh: for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof: whosoever eateth it shall be cut off. 15 And every soul that eateth that which died of itself, or that which was torn with beasts, whether it be one of your own country, or a stranger, he shall both wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even: then shall he be clean. 16 But if he wash them not, nor bathe his flesh; then he shall bear his iniquity.
We have here, I. A repetition and confirmation of the law against eating blood. We have met with this prohibition twice before in the levitical law (Lev 3:17; Lev 7:26), besides the place it had in the precepts of Noah, Gen. ix. 4. But here, 1. The prohibition is repeated again and again, and reference had to the former laws to this purport (v. 12): I said to the children of Israel, No soul of you shall eat blood; and again (v. 14), You shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh. A great stress is laid upon it, as a law which has more in it than at first view one would think. 2. It is made binding, not only on the house of Israel, but on the strangers that sojourned among them (v. 10), which perhaps was one reason why it was thought advisable, for a time, to forbid blood to the Gentile converts, Acts xv. 29. 3. The penalty annexed to this law is very severe (v. 10): I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, if he do it presumptuously, and will cut him off; and again (v. 14), He shall be cut off. Note, God’s wrath will be the sinner’s ruin. Write that man undone, for ever undone, against whom God sets his face; for what creature is able to confront the Creator? 4. A reason is given for this law (v. 11): because it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul; and therefore it was appointed to make atonement with, because the life of the flesh is the blood. The sinner deserved to die; therefore the sacrifice must die. Now, the blood being so the life that ordinarily beasts were killed for man’s use by the drawing out of all their blood, God appointed the sprinkling or pouring out of the blood of the sacrifice upon the altar to signify that the life of the sacrifice was given to God instead of the sinner’s life, and as a ransom or counter-price for it; therefore without shedding of blood there was no remission, Heb. ix. 22. For this reason they must eat no blood, and, (1.) It was then a very good reason; for God would by this means preserve the honour of that way of atonement which he had instituted, and keep up in the minds of the people a reverent regard to it. The blood of the covenant being then a sensible object, no blood must be either eaten or trodden under foot as a common thing, as they must have no ointment nor perfume like that which God ordered them to make for himself. But, (2.) This reason is now superseded, which intimates that the law itself was ceremonial, and is now no longer in force: the blood of Christ who has come (and we are to look for no other) is that alone which makes atonement for the soul, and of which the blood of the sacrifices was an imperfect type: the coming of the substance supersedes the shadow. The blood of beasts is no longer the ransom, but Christ’s blood only; and therefore there is not now that reason for abstaining from blood which there was then, and we cannot suppose it was the will of God that the law should survive the reason of it. The blood, provided it be so prepared as not to be unwholesome, is now allowed for the nourishment of our bodies, because it is no longer appointed to make an atonement for the soul. (3.) Yet it has still useful significancy. The life is in the blood; it is the vehicle of the animal spirits, and God would have his people to regard the life even of their beasts, and not to be cruel and hard-hearted, not to take delight in any thing that is barbarous. They must not be a blood-thirsty people. The blood then made atonement figuratively, now the blood of Christ makes atonement really and effectually; to this therefore we must have a reverent regard, and not use it as a common thing, for he will set his face against those that do so, and they shall be cut off, Heb. x. 29.
II. Some other precepts are here given as appendages to this law, and hedges about it, 1. They must cover the blood of that which they took in hunting, v. 13. They must not only not eat it, but must give it a decent burial, in token of some mystery which they must believe lay hidden in this constitution. The Jews look upon this as a very weighty precept and appoint that the blood should be covered with these words, Blessed be he that hath sanctified us by his precepts, and commanded us to cover blood. 2. They must not eat that which died of itself or was torn of beasts (v. 15), for the blood was either not at all, or not regularly, drawn out of them. God would have them to be curious in their diet, not with the curiosity that gratifies the sensual appetite, but with that which checks and restrains it. God would not have his children to eat every thing that came in their way with greediness, but to consider diligently what was before them, that they might learn in other things to ask questions for conscience’ sake. Those that flew upon the spoiled sinned, 1Sa 14:32; 1Sa 14:33. If a man did, through ignorance or inconsideration, eat the flesh of any beast not duly slain, he must wash himself and his clothes, else he bore his iniquity,Lev 17:15; Lev 17:16. The pollution was ceremonial, so was the purification from it; but if a man slighted the prescribed method of cleansing, or would not submit, he thereby contracted moral guilt. See the nature of a remedial law: he that obeys it has the benefit of it; he that does not, not only remains under his former guilt, but adds to that guilt of contemning the provisions made by divine grace for his relief, and sins against the remedy.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Verses 10-16:
The preceding verses stress the important role of the blood in the sacrifices offered on Israel’s central altar. This is followed by the repetition of the ancient prohibition of eating blood. This was first mandated in Ge 9:4, and is repeated in Le 3:17; 7:26; 19:26; De 12:16; 15:23. Violation of this was to bring excommunication.
The reason for this prohibition: The life is in the blood. That is, the blood is the vehicle which carries life. Blood was required for atonement; hence, the life of the innocent must stand as substitute for the life of the guilty. Thus the command has spiritual significance. The life of Jesus was required as the payment for the sins of mankind, 2Co 5:21;
This injunction applies to God’s people today, as the result of the Jerusalem Council shows, Ac 15:28, 29.
The law required that the blood of a wild animal slain in hunting was to be covered with dust or dirt. This was to prevent the contamination of the land.
An animal which died “of itself,” or which was killed by another animal, could be eaten. However, this would cause the one eating to be ceremonial unclean, and he would be required to go through the elaborate ritual of purification.
The prohibition regarding the eating of blood applied alike to the Israelites and to those non-Israelites who lived in their midst.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
10. And whatsoever make there be of the house of Israel. God here not only condemns to death whosoever shall have polluted themselves by eating of blood, but declares that He will Himself take vengeance on them, though they may escape from the hands of the judges; for He not only prescribes to the judges what it is right for them to do, but asserts for Himself the office of inflicting the punishment. For, if we consider the intention of the Law, is there anything to surprise us in this; for although it be not consistent that the blood of a brute should be compensated for by the death of a man, still we must remember that this mode of instruction (22) was necessary for a rude people, lest they should speedily lapse into barbarism. But, lest they should complain that no use remained for the blood, He reminds them that since it was given for atonement, they would be very ungrateful if they were not content with so great a blessing; and surely, since it was the price they were to pay for appeasing God, this was an employment of it far to be preferred to food. If, then, they desired to exchange into ordinary food the blood, which was destined to the altar for the reconciliation of God, Moses indirectly reproves their ingratitude; for when God took away the right of eating it, He left them something better, which should have abundantly satisfied them. But we have elsewhere (23) seen in what manner blood atones for souls, i e. , in a sacramental manner, upon which it must be observed that what properly belongs to Christ is thus transferred by metonomy to figures and symbols, yet in such a way that the similitude should neither be empty nor inefficacious; for in so far as the fathers apprehended Christ in the external sacrifices, atonement was truly exhibited in them. In this passage also, I do not understand “the strangers” to be all such visitors as may have journeyed amongst them on matters of business, but those who had devoted themselves to the worship of God; for many foreigners, abandoning their superstitions, were circumcised, and it behooved that such as these should be expressly laid under the bonds of the Law, lest, if it had not referred to them, they should have withdrawn themselves from obeying it. This point must, therefore, be briefly adverted to, lest we should suppose that heathen sojourners were prohibited from the eating of blood, whereas they were allowed to buy for food (24) even flesh that had been torn by beasts.
Since, however, the Patriarchs before the Law had abstained from blood, and its prohibition had no reference to the First Table or the legal service, hence it came to pass that when the Apostles abrogated the ceremonial law, they did not dare to allow immediately the free eating of blood, lest great scandal should arise from this new and unwonted thing. (Act 15:20.) Wherefore, lest so trifling a matter should cause deadly schisms in the Churches, they commanded the Gentiles not to eat of blood; adding as the reason, that those who were accustomed to read the writings of Moses, would be disturbed at this innovation; yet this was only observed for a short period, as we gather from Paul. (25) It was, not without superstition and misplaced zeal;. retained by some even to the days of Tertullian.
(22) “Hanc paedagogiam. ” — Lat. “Ceste doctrine puerile.” — Fr.
(23) See on Exo 12:21, ante vol. 1 p. 221.
(24) See on Deu 14:21, ante vol. 2, p. 69.
(25) There is no reference here in the Latin, but the Fr. is, “comme il se peut recueillir par ce que Sainct Paul en escrit aux Corinthiens;” as may be gathered from what St. Paul writes respecting it to the Corinthians. In C. ’ s Commentary on the Acts, 15:28, he says, “We know that this law was foredone by Paul, so soon as the tumult and contention was once ended, when he teacheth that nothing is unclean, (Rom 14:14,)and when he granteth liberty to eat all manner of meats, yea, even such as were sacrificed to idols. (1Co 10:25.)” — C. Society ’ s edit. , vol. 2, p. 79. Tertullian, Apol. , cap. 9, speaks as follows; “Erubescat error vester Christianis, qui ne animalium quidem sanguinem in epulis esculentas habemus, qui propterea quoque suffocatis et morticinis abstinemus, ne quo modo sanguine contaminemur, vel intra viscera sepulto.” See Bingham, book 17 ch. 5 sec. 20 “But on the other hand, because it was the custom of the Catholic Church, almost to the time of St. Austin, to abstain from eating of blood, in compliance with the rule given by the Apostles to the Gentile converts; therefore, by the most ancient laws of the Church, all clergymen were obliged to abstain from it under pain of degradation. This is evident from the Apostolical Canons, and those of Gangra, and the second Council of Orleans, and the Council of Trullo. But as this was looked upon by some only as a temporary injunction, so it appears from St. Austin that it was of no force in the African Church. (Contra Faust., lib. 32, c. 13.) He that would see more about it may consult Curcellaeus, who has written a large dissertation upon the subject.”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
PROHIBITION OF BLOOD IN THE PEOPLES DIET 17:1014
TEXT 17:1014
10
And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among them, that eateth any manner of blood, I will set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people.
11
For the life of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh atonement by reason of the life.
12
Therefore I said unto the children of Israel, No soul of you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger that sojourneth among you eat blood.
13
And whatsoever man there be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among them, who taketh in hunting any beast or bird that may be eaten; he shall pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust.
14
For as to the life of all flesh, the blood thereof is all one with the life thereof: therefore I said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh; for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof: whosoever eateth it shall be cut off.
THOUGHT QUESTIONS 17:1014
380.
Compare Eze. 33:25 and show how it relates to this section.
381.
Just what is involved in the atonement for our souls found in the blood? Cf. Rom. 3:24-26.
382.
Does this regulation still stand for today? i.e. eating blood?
383.
What else would a hunter do but pour out the blood of a deer or antelope? Why cover it with dust?
384.
God really must have meant this regulation, i.e. judging from the times it is repeated. Is this a fair conclusion?
PARAPHRASE 17:1014
And I will turn My face against anyone, whether an Israelite or a foreigner living among you, who eats blood in any form. I will excommunicate him from his people. For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given you the blood to sprinkle upon the altar as an atonement for your souls; it is the blood that makes atonement, because it is the life. That is the reasoning behind My decree to the people of Israel, that neither they, nor any foreigner living among them, may eat blood. Anyone, whether an Israelite or a foreigner living among you, who goes hunting and kills an animal or bird of a kind permitted for food, must pour out the blood and cover it with dust, for the blood is the life. That is why I told the people of Israel never to eat it, for the life of every bird and animal is its blood. Therefore, anyone who eats blood must be excommunicated.
COMMENT 17:1014
Lev. 17:10-14 This is the third time we have read of the prohibition of the eating of blood. In the other two references it is associated with the fat which belongs to God (Cf. Lev. 3:17; Lev. 7:26). Since Israel was held responsible for those under their roofs (at least temporarily) even strangers, visitors or sojourners are involved in this regulation. It is a serious matter to have the face of God set against us. What is the cause? Why such a stringent punishment? It is because what is represented and contained in the bloodboth of man and of animals. The life or soul is in the bloodboth of man and of beast. God is making a substitutethe life or soul of the animal for the life or soul of the man. To disregard or treat lightly this important entity is to call common what God has called sacred. Perhaps a study of the triune nature of man will help in our understanding of the biblical fact that the blood is the carrier of the self-conscious portion of mans nature:
(1)
BODY:
Made of dust, corruptible and subject to decay. Mans body is mortal or deathable. It is to return to the dust. It is the outer man. The tabernacle in which we live for this brief sojourn called life. This is the outward house of the spirit and the soul.
(2)
SOUL:
Mans self-consciousness. It is formed in or by the unity of the spirit and the body. This is mans individuality, i.e., what makes him different from every other person. Our parents provide our body. God provides the spirit. When the two (body and spirit) unite, the result is you. A living life unique and wondrously made. You are one of a kind.
(3)
SPIRIT:
Our parents produced our bodies but God is the Father of the spirits of all flesh. As our bodies partake of the physical likeness and image of our parents, so our spirits partake of the likeness or image of God. We are His offspring (Act. 17:28). All the capacities of man are capacities of His spirit since God is alive in the same sense we are, and has given us of Himself.
The crucial decision is whom will ye serve, your spirit or your soul? i.e. will you decide to worship God or mammon? You are God related thru your spirit and this-world related thru your soul. Will you be soulish or spiritual?
The strangers are also prohibited eating blood because they have submitted to the law of the land, and because their eating it would not only infringe the law which they have voluntarily adopted, but would lessen the horror with which such indulgence was regarded by the Jews. (Cf. Act. 15:20; Act. 15:29; Act. 21:25)
FACT QUESTIONS 17:1014
389.
Blood is usually associated with what other portion of the animal? Why?
390.
Was it reasonable to ask strangers to submit to the laws of Israel? Discuss.
391.
Define the triune nature of man and show how the soul or the blood is involved.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(10) And whatsoever man.Better, and what man soever. (See Lev. 17:8.)
Eateth any manner of blood.This prohibition, which has already been mentioned twice in Leviticus, is in both instances joined to the prohibition of fat. (See Lev. 3:17; Lev. 7:26-27.) Owing to its great importance, however, the law is enacted here separately, where it naturally follows the order that the blood of all animals sacrificed in the sanctuary is to be offered to the Lord upon the altar. According to the canons which obtained during the second Temple, the blood of clean fishes, of locusts, and of permissible creeping things is exempted.
I will even set my face against that soul.That is, make him feel my anger. Though this phrase only occurs twice more in this book, and only once in connection with legal enactments (see Lev. 20:3; Lev. 20:6; Lev. 26:17), yet from its usages in other passages it is clear that the expression face denotes anger, which shows itself in the countenance. Thus the phrase, which is translated in the Authorised Version, I will appease him (Gen. 30:20), is in the original, I will appease his face, where it manifestly stands for anger. Hence Lam. 4:16, which is in the original, the face of the Lord hath divided them, is properly rendered in the Authorised Version in the text by the anger of the Lord. (Comp. also 1Pe. 3:12.)
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
10. I will even set my face against This form of words indicates that the extermination of the blood eater will not be by imperfect human judicatories, but by the direct intervention of Jehovah cutting off the offender, as if guilty of a most heinous crime. See Lev 7:26, note.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Eating of Blood Forbidden
v. 10. And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood, I will even set My face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people. v. 11. For the life of the flesh is in the blood, v. 12. Therefore I said unto the children of Israel, No soul of you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger that sojourneth among you eat blood.
v. 13. And whatsoever man there be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, which hunteth and catcheth any beast or fowl that may be eaten, v. 14. For it is the life of all flesh; the blood of it is the life thereof. Therefore I said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh; for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof; whosoever eateth it shall be cut off. v. 15. And every soul that eateth that which died of itself, or that which was torn with beasts, whether it be one of your own country or a stranger, he shall both wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even; then shall he be clean. v. 16. But if he wash them not, nor bathe his flesh, then he shall bear his iniquity.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
DISCOURSE: 134
THE PROHIBITION TO EAT BLOOD
Lev 17:10-12. Whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you. that eateth any manner of blood, I will even set my face against that soul that eateth Hood, and will cut him off from among his people. For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I hare given it to you upon the altar, to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul. Therefore I said unto the children of Israel, No soul of you shall eat blood; neither shall any stranger that sojourneth among you eat blood.
THERE were many ordinances amongst the Jews, of which we cannot see the reason, though doubtless there was not one which Infinite Wisdom did not institute for some gracious end. But the particular enactment before us was of much longer standing than most others, having been given to Noah directly after the flood. The flesh of beasts and of fowls was then given to man for food: but he was at the same time forbidden to eat the blood of either [Note: Gen 9:4.]. In the foregoing parts of this book also the prohibition had been repeatedly renewed [Note: Lev 3:17; Lev 7:26.]: and here the reason for such a repeated enactment of the same statute is assigned. Indeed from the peculiar strictness with which the law is here enforced, we might be sure that there was some very important reason for it, though none had been specified. But God, in this passage, has condescended to state the grounds of this solemn charge; namely, that the blood was the life of the flesh, and that it had been given to man to make an atonement for his soul.
To elucidate this ordinance, I shall,
I.
Confirm the fact here stated
God had from the beginning appointed the blood of animals to be offered by man as an atonement for his soul.
This appears throughout all the Mosaic history
[If we go back to the time of Cain and Abel, we shall find Abel offering of the firstlings of his flock, and of his receiving on that account a testimony of Gods acceptance, which was denied to Cain, who offered only of the fruits of the ground [Note: Gen 4:3-5.]. This, we are assured, was done in faith; which shews, that it was done in consequence of an ordinance to that effect having been previously given by God, with a promise of acceptance annexed to it [Note: Heb 11:4.]. Noah likewise after the flood offered of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, upon an altar; and in that act was approved of his God [Note: Gen 8:20-21.]. The Patriarchs also built altars to the Lord from time to time, and presented their offerings upon them. Job also lived in the habitual practice of the same rite [Note: Job 1:5.]. As for Moses, the whole of his law was one continued system of sacrifices, appointed as means of obtaining forgiveness with God; every kind of sin having its distinct sacrifices appointed to atone for it. In all of these, blood was shed, and poured out before the altar, and sprinkled on the altar; and on the great day of annual expiation, was carried within the sanctuary, and was sprinkled before the mercy-seat, and upon the mercy-seat. With one exception only, there was no remission of sins without shedding of blood [Note: Heb 9:21-22.]. If a man was so poor as not to be able to offer a, lamb or a pair of turtle-doves for his transgression, he was to offer some fine flour; a part of which was to be burnt upon the altar, in token that he had merited destruction by his iniquities, and that he escaped destruction only by that being destroyed in his stead [Note: Lev 5:11.].]
The same is found throughout the whole New Testament
[It had been foretold by Daniel, that Jesus should make an end of sin, and make reconciliation for iniquity. But how was this to be done? It was, as another prophet testifies, by being wounded for our transgressions, and bruised for our iniquities, or, in a word, by making his soul an offering for sin [Note: Isa 53:5; Isa 53:10.]. Accordingly our blessed Lord himself tells us that he came to give his life a ransom for many. And, when he instituted his last supper, he took the cup, and said, This is my blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins [Note: Mat 26:28.]. The Apostles continually represent the blessings of salvation as being solely the purchase of his blood. He hath made peace for us through the blood of his cross, and we have redemption through it, even the forgiveness of sins [Note: Col 1:14; Col 1:20.]. Are we washed from our sins? it is by his blood [Note: Rev 1:5.]. Do we wash our robes and make them white? it is in the blood of the Lamb [Note: Rev 7:14.]. Do we overcome our enemies? it is by the blood of the Lamb [Note: Rev 12:11.], Are we justified? it is by his blood [Note: Rom 5:9.]. In a word, all on earth and all in heaven bear testimony to this blessed truth, that Jesus hath redeemed us to God by his blood [Note: Rev 5:9.].]
This fact then being undeniable, that God has given us the blood as an atonement for the soul, we proceed to,
II.
Consider the prohibition as founded on it
Scarcely is such energy to be found in any other prohibition throughout the whole Scriptures, as in that before us. And how is it to be accounted for? What is there in the fact alleged that can justify such tremendous menaces as are annexed to this injunction? I answer, The prohibition was most salutary for them, as tending,
1.
To excite in them reverence for their sacrifices
[The Jews saw continually the same animals slaughtered for their own use as were slain for sacrifice: and, if no restraint had been imposed upon them in relation to the blood, they would soon have lost their reverence for the sacrifice altogether. Even the daily repetition of the same sacrifices had of itself a tendency to familiarize their minds with the offerings, and to weaken the reverence which a more sparing use of them might have generated. But when they were so strictly charged to abstain from the use of the blood themselves, and saw the blood of the sacrifices consecrated exclusively to the Lord, they could scarcely fail to reverence the blood, and consequently to reverence those ordinances in which the welfare of their souls was so deeply concerned.]
2.
To bring continually to their remembrance the way of salvation
[With the prohibition was communicated the reason of it, namely, that the blood was the life, and was given as an atonement for their souls. Now we are but too prone to forget the concerns of our souls: the mind naturally revolts from them, and puts the consideration of them far away. But this ordinance brought continually to their recollection, that they were sinners, needing an atonement; and that they were to be saved only through the intervention of a vicarious sacrifice. Of what incalculable value was the prohibition in this point of view! Not a day, or scarcely an hour, could pass, but they were reminded of these most essential articles of their faith, and taught how alone they were to obtain favour in the sight of God. Various other ordinances were appointed of God for reminding them of the way in which they should serve him; but here one was instituted for bringing constantly to their remembrance the way in which they were to be saved by him.]
3.
To direct their attention to the great sacrifice
[All the more intelligent and pious among the Jews saw that their sacrifices shadowed forth some sacrifice that was of infinitely greater value. It is true, their notions respecting Christs sacrifice were not distinct: yet they could not but see that the blood of bulls and of goats was insufficient to take away sin; and that consequently they must look forward to some other atonement which these typical sacrifices prefigured. To these views they would be further led by the prophecies which represented Christ as bearing on himself, and taking away from us, the iniquities of us all. And even at this hour, I conceive that the prohibition, which is strictly observed by every religious Jew, is well calculated to lead the minds of the Jewish nation to the contemplation of their Messiah, and to the acknowledgment of Jesus in that character.]
From the foregoing subject then we may see,
1.
How plain is the way of salvation!
[A Jew who had any reflection at all, could not be ignorant that he must be saved by blood, by blood shed in a way of atonement for his sins. He would not dream that he was to make an atonement by his own tears, or alms-deeds, or observances of any kind. Every sacrifice which he saw offered, yea, and every meal which he made on the flesh of animals, would remind him, that his soul could be saved by nothing but an atonement made for sin. Yet, strange as it must appear, Christians without number are ignorant of this fundamental article of our religion, and have no better hope towards God than that which is founded on their own repentances and reformations. Alas! that any who have the Christian Scriptures in their hands should be thus ignorant! and yet thus it is even with many who in other respects are well instructed and intelligent. But know ye assuredly, that there is but one way of salvation either for Jews or Gentiles; and that, the shadowy sacrifices having all passed away, Christ is now set forth as a propitiation for sin through faith in his blood, and that he is a propitiation, not for our sins only, but also for the sins of the whole world.]
2.
How awful is the state of those who reject it!
[We tremble for those who despised Moses law, and in contempt of the divine command ate of blood. But how much more must we tremble for those who make light of Christ! For, if they who despised Moses law died without mercy, of how much sorer punishment suppose ye shall he be thought worthy, who has trodden under foot the Son of God, and counted the blood of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified a common thing [Note: Heb 10:28-29 ] ! The command given to us to drink of the blood of our great sacrifice is not a whit less urgent than the prohibition given to the Jews. Our Lord expressly tells us, that except we eat his flesh and drink his blood, we have no life in us: and St. Paul gives us this solemn warning, How can we escape, if we neglect so great salvation! Verily, if God set his face against the disobedient Jew, much more will he against the disobedient and unbelieving Christian. I charge you then, my brethren, to comply with the divine command in this respect: for if ye do not, O consider what shall the end be of them that obey not the Gospel of Christ! Verily, God has told us, and plainly too, that when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven in flaming fire, it shall be to take vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. Let us now then avail ourselves of the opportunity afforded us, and both take of the blood of Christ, and sprinkle it on our consciences, that it may purge us from dead works to serve the living God.]
Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)
This precept was given as early as in the days of Noah. So leading a doctrine was the atonement, that even then it was held forth in these distant allusions. See Gen 9:4-5 ; Lev 3:17 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Lev 17:10 And whatsoever man [there be] of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people.
Ver. 10. That eateth any manner of blood. ] See Trapp on “ Gen 9:4 “
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
soul = Hebrew. nephesh. App-13.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
that eateth: Lev 17:11, Lev 3:17, Lev 7:26, Lev 7:27, Lev 19:26, Gen 9:4, Deu 12:16, Deu 12:23, Deu 15:23, 1Sa 14:33, Eze 33:25, Eze 44:7, Act 15:20, Act 15:29, Heb 10:29
I will: Lev 20:3-6, Lev 26:17, Psa 34:16, Jer 21:10, Jer 44:11, Eze 14:8, Eze 15:7
Reciprocal: Exo 12:15 – that soul Lev 7:21 – cut off Lev 17:4 – be cut off Lev 17:8 – that offereth Lev 18:26 – nor any stranger Lev 18:29 – General Lev 20:5 – I will Lev 22:18 – Whatsoever Lev 24:22 – General Num 9:13 – forbeareth 1Sa 14:32 – did eat 2Sa 23:17 – the blood 1Ch 11:19 – shall I Amo 9:4 – set Col 2:16 – in meat 1Pe 3:12 – but
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Lev 17:10. I will set my face I will be an enemy to him, and execute vengeance upon him immediately; because such persons probably would do this in private, so that the magistrate could not know nor punish it. Write that man undone, for ever undone, against whom God sets his face.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Lev 17:10-12. Prohibition of Eating Blood, i.e. of eating flesh not properly drained of blood (Gen 9:4*).The reason given, that the life is in the blood (Lev 17:11), underlies the special importance of the blood in the earlier chapters and the whole sacrificial practice. The blood makes atonement, i.e. it is the part of the sacrifice brought into contact, so to speak, with Yahweh, which therefore secures the worshippers power to approach Yahweh Himself, the main object of the sacrifice. As such, the blood would naturally be dangerous for man; its use would be an invasion of Yahwehs prerogative (cf. the prohibition of fat, Lev 3:17). The prohibition of blood has therefore been applied by Jews to all slaughter, in every age (cf. Lev 17:13). Disobedience is as dangerous for aliens (Lev 17:12) as for Hebrews. Note that Yahweh Himself is felt to cut off the criminal (Lev 17:10, contrast Lev 17:9), and to provide the ancient taboo as a means of approach to Himself (Lev 17:11).
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
17:10 And whatsoever man [there be] of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set {g} my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people.
(g) I will declare my wrath by taking vengeance on him as in Lev 20:3.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
God also prohibited the ingesting of blood (Lev 17:11; cf. Lev 3:17; Lev 7:26-27; Lev 19:26; Gen 9:4; Deu 12:15-16; Deu 12:23-24; Deu 15:23). From this law the Jews developed methods of draining or washing the blood out of meat that resulted in kosher (meaning fit or proper) meat. [Note: Harrison, p. 181.] The incidence of blood disease among livestock was much higher in ancient times than it is today. [Note: Fawver and Overstreet, p. 275.] Careful observance of this law would have resulted in healthier Israelites as well as obedient Israelites.
Blood is the life-sustaining fluid of the body (Lev 17:11; Lev 17:14). It is inherently necessary to maintain animal life, thus the close connection between blood and life. Life poured out in bloodshed made atonement for sin. Consequently the eating or drinking of blood was inappropriate since blood had expiatory value and represented life.
"By refraining from eating flesh with blood in it, man is honoring life. To eat blood is to despise life. This idea emerges most clearly in Gen 9:4 ff., where the sanctity of human life is associated with not eating blood. Thus one purpose of this law is the inculcation of respect for all life." [Note: Wenham, The Book . . ., p. 245. Cf. Hertz, p. 168.]
The animals in view here seem to be those slain in hunting; they were not sacrificial animals (Lev 17:13; cf. Deu 12:15). However the restriction about eating blood applied to all animals that the Israelites ate. Since God forbade eating blood before the Mosaic Law (Gen 9:4), which Christ terminated, people today should also refrain from eating it. What is in view is not simply eating "rare" meat (pink or red meat with a little blood in it) but larger quantities of blood either separately or as a kind of side dish. Eating raw, uncooked meat was also inappropriate.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
THE PROHIBITION OF FAT AND BLOOD
Lev 3:16-17; Lev 7:22-27; Lev 17:10-16
And the priest shall burn them upon the altar: it is the food of the offering made by fire, for a sweet savour: all the fat is the Lords. It shall be a perpetual statute throughout your generations in all your dwellings, that ye shall eat neither fat nor blood. And the Lord spake unto Moses, saving, Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, Ye shall eat no fat, of ox, or sheep, or goat. And the fat of that which dieth of itself, and the fat of that which is torn of beasts, may be used for any other service; but ye shall in no wise eat of it. For whosoever eateth the fat of the beast, of which men offer an offering made by fire unto the Lord, even the soul that eateth it shall be cut off from his people. And ye shall eat no man net of blood, whether it be of fowl or of beast, in any of your dwellings. Whosoever it be that eateth any blood, that soul shall be cut off from his people And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among them, that eateth any manner of blood; I will set My face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people. For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh atonement by reason of the life. Therefore I said unto the children of Israel, No soul of you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger that sojourneth among you eat blood. And whatsoever man there be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among them, which taketh in hunting any beast or fowl that may be eaten; he shall pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust. For as to the life of all flesh, the blood thereof is all one with the life thereof: therefore I said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh: for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof: whosoever eateth it shall be cut off. And every soul that eateth that which dieth of itself, or that which is torn of beasts, whether he be homeborn or a stranger, he shall, wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even: then shall he be clean. But if he wash them not, nor bathe his flesh, then “he shall bear his iniquity.”
The chapter concerning the peace offering ends (Lev 3:16-17) with these words: “All the fat is the Lords. It shall be a perpetual statute for you throughout your generations, that ye shall eat neither fat nor blood.”
To this prohibition so much importance was attached that in the supplemental “law of the peace offering” {Lev 7:22-27} it is repeated with added explanation and solemn warning, thus: “And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, saying. Ye shall eat no manner of fat, of ox, or of sheep, or of goat. And the fat of the beast that dieth of itself, and the fat of that which is torn with beasts, may be used for any other service: but ye shall in no wise eat of it. For whosoever eateth the fat of the beast, of which men offer an offering made by fire unto the Lord, even the soul that eateth it shall be cut off from his people. And ye shall eat no manner of blood, whether it be of fowl or of beast, in any of your dwellings. Whosoever it be that eateth any blood, that soul shall be cut off from his people.”
From which it appears that this prohibition of the eating of fat referred only to the fat of such beasts as were used for sacrifice. With these, however, the law was absolute, whether the animal was presented for sacrifice, or only slain for food. It held good with regard to these animals, even when, because of the manner of their death, they could not be used for sacrifice. In such cases, though the fat might be used for other purposes, still it must not be used for food.
The prohibition of the blood as food appears from Lev 17:10 to have been absolutely universal; it is said, “Whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among them, that eateth any manner of blood, I will set My face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people.”
The reason for the prohibition of the eating of blood, whether in the case of the sacrificial feasts of the peace offerings or on other occasions, is given, {Lev 17:11-12} in these words: “For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh atonement by reason of the life. Therefore I said unto the children of Israel, No soul of you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger that sojourneth among you eat blood.”
And the prohibition is then extended to include not only the blood of animals which were used upon the altar, but also such as were taken in hunting, thus (Lev 17:13): “And whatsoever man there be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among them, which taketh in hunting any beast or fowl that may be eaten, he shall pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust,” as something of peculiar sanctity; and then the reason previously given is repeated with emphasis (Lev 17:14): “For as to the life of all flesh, the blood thereof is all one with the life thereof: therefore I said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh: for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof; whosoever eateth it shall be cut off.”
And since, when an animal died from natural causes, or through being torn of a beast, the blood would be drawn from the flesh either not at all or but imperfectly, as further guarding against the possibility of eating blood, it is ordered (Lev 17:15-16) that he who does this shall be held unclean: “Every soul that eateth that which dieth of itself, or that which is torn of beasts, whether he be home born or a stranger, he shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even. But if he wash them not nor bathe his flesh, then he shall bear his iniquity.”
These passages explicitly state the reason for the prohibition by God of the use of blood for food to be the fact that, as the vehicle of the life, it has been appointed by Him as the means of expiation for sin upon the altar. And the reason for the prohibition of the fat is similar; namely, its appropriation for God upon the altar, as in the peace offerings, the sin offerings, and the guilt offerings; “all the fat is the Lords.”
Thus the Israelite, by these two prohibitions, was to be continually reminded, so often as he partook of his daily food, of two things: by the one, of atonement by the blood as the only ground of acceptance; and by the other, of Gods claim on the man redeemed by the blood, for the consecration of his best. Not only so, but by the frequent repetition, and still more by the heavy penalty attached to the violation of these laws, he was reminded of the exceeding importance that these two things had in the mind of God. If he eat the blood of any animal claimed by God for the altar, he should be cut off from his people; that is, outlawed, and cut off from all covenant privilege as a citizen of the kingdom of God in Israel. And even though the blood were that of the beast taken in the chase, still ceremonial purification was required as the condition of resuming his covenant position.
Nothing, doubtless, seems to most Christians of our day more remote from practical religion than these regulations touching the fat and the blood which are brought before us with such fulness in the law of the peace offering and elsewhere. And yet nothing is of more present day importance in this law than the principles which underlie these regulations. For as with type, so with antitype. No less essential to the admission of the sinful man into that blessed fellowship with a reconciled God, which the peace offering typified, is the recognition of the supreme sanctity of the precious sacrificial blood of the Lamb of God; no less essential to the life of happy communion with God, is the ready consecration of the best fruit of our life to Him.
Surely, both of these, and especially the first, are truths for our time. For no observing man can fail to recognise the very ominous fact that a constantly increasing number, even of professed preachers of the Gospel, in so many words refuse to recognise the place which propitiatory blood has in the Gospel of Christ, and to admit its preeminent sanctity as consisting in this, that it was given on the altar to make atonement for our souls. Nor has the present generation outgrown the need of the other reminder touching the consecration of the best to the Lord. How many there are, comfortable, easy-going Christians, whose principle-if one might speak in the idiom of the Mosaic law-would rather seem to be, ever to give the lean to God, and keep the fat, the best fruit of their life and activity, for themselves! Such need to be most urgently and solemnly reminded that in spirit the warning against the eating of the blood and the fat is in full force. It was written of such as should break this law, “that soul shall be cut off from his people.” And so in the Epistle to the Hebrews {Heb 10:26-29} we find one of its most solemn warnings directed to those who “count this blood of the covenant,” the blood of Christ, “an unholy (i.e., common) thing”; as exposed by this, their undervaluation of the sanctity of the blood, to a “sorer punishment” than overtook him that “set at naught Moses law,” even the retribution of Him who said, “Vengeance is Mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.”
And so in this law of the peace offerings, which ordains the conditions of the holy feast of fellowship with a reconciled God, we find these two things made fundamental in the symbolism: full recognition of the sanctity of the blood as that which atones for the soul; and the full consecration of the redeemed and pardoned soul to the Lord. So was it in the symbol; and so shall it be when the sacrificial feast shall at last receive its most complete fulfilment in the communion of the redeemed with Christ in glory. There will be no differences of opinion then and there, either as to the transcendent value of that precious blood which made atonement, or as to the full consecration which such a redemption requires from the redeemed.