What does it mean that the blood is the life (Deuteronomy 12:23)?

The blood was the life, and man was not to eat it. It would have been a bold re-assuming of that which through sin he had lost, a challenge to regain life by forcing the passage kept by the sword of the cherubim. For this ordinance told the sinner, that having lost his title to the tree of life, he can never return to it in his own strength. The life has reverted to God. Blood is His. And the gospel comes to tell us how He has used it, even providing with it and through it new, eternal, infallible life for the dead sinner.

So, in our chapter, we have laid down not only the instruction as to the place that God would choose, but also as to how they should bring their offerings, of clean animals, and while shedding their blood, taking care not to eat of it themselves. This is repeated twice in this chapter, and they were reminded that "the blood is the life;" and life comes directly from God; so that when killing an animal they were to pour the blood forth as water upon the earth. This was blood "as water." It is a remarkable fact that when the soldier pierced the side of Jesus, "forthwith came there out blood and water" (John 19:34). In his epistle the Apostle John reminds us that our Lord came by blood as well as by water: that is, it not only is the basis of moral and spiritual cleansing but it paid the penalty of sin in the yielding up of His life's blood. It is just this latter fact that many in our day are unwilling to admit, but which is of all importance. Life comes from God, and the blood being the life of all flesh it is sacred and not to be eaten as a common thing.

In a lesser sense they are taught to make all taking of life a "sacrifice" to the Lord, the word being used here with regard to what is at any time used for food, the blood being poured upon the ground as the life which belongs to God. It is the application of the principle of Lev. 17 (which in its full detail was only possible in the camp in the wilderness) to the land at large. Here, as there, the sacredness of life was to be realized, and their own life to be constantly lifted into spiritual meaning, and brought near to God. Each common meal was to have, as far as this could be given to it, the character of a peace-offering: it was to be enjoyed in communion with God.

But the result of these views is, to ignore, or diminish to nothing, the death of the victim. If the soul of man is to be covered by the soul of beast (strange covering for it!), then some way, in the blood sprinkled on the altar, the soul of the beast must be supposed still to survive; And to justify this, we are reminded of the expressions "living water" and "living flesh" (in distinction from cooked meat — 1 Sam. 2:15). As Oehler asks, with Kurtz's distinct approval, "Can it be surprising, then, that the fresh, steaming, and still fluid blood should be regarded as blood with life and soul in it still?" And this is sought to be maintained by the rendering of the last part of the verse — "'for the blood expiates through the soul,' — that is, in virtue of the fact that the soul is in it."

Substituting "life" for "soul," for the reasons given, there can be no objection to translating with the R.V., "For it is the blood that maketh atonement by reason of the life." The blood is the life of the body, and so represents it, and he that ate blood would be therefore cut off: — not merely "fresh, steaming blood," as these views would suppose, but blood in any way. The blood poured out is thus the life poured out — the symbol of death, not of existing life.

28 In speaking of blood it is always the life of the flesh, not of man, but of all flesh, though of man as flesh, i.e., in his animal nature. Indeed, in Genesis 9 it is carefully distinguished.

The life is in the blood, but He requires the life of man from his brother, because in the image of God He made man. See Leviticus 17:10-14, and Deuteronomy 12, but I do not exactly know what da-mo v'naph'sho (the blood thereof for the life thereof) means. Query, if the accents be not wrong - the munakh under da-mo - and if it should not read, "for the life of all flesh (is) his blood," it is for his soul.

For v'naph'sho - with, or for the life of it, compare Leviticus 17:14, twice, and Genesis 9:4; from the last it is evident, I think, that the expression means in its state of living existence, flesh; v'naph'sho, is not to be eaten; and that state - of flesh ruined - lies in its blood. Thus, Leviticus 17:14, becomes plain, "the life of all flesh," i.e., the subject life in flesh. The fact is simply stated at the end of the verse: ne'phesh kol-ba-sar' da-mo hu - "the life of all flesh is its blood"; i.e., the abstract principle - flesh's life - is the blood. The beginning of the verse merely adds that it is in its state of living existence. Genesis 9:4, comes in to show that the term means with the life in it - flesh, with the life in it - or its state of living existence - which is the blood.

Here we have, most surely, a broad margin afforded by the goodness and tender mercy of God, for the fullest range of personal and family enjoyment. The only restriction was in reference to the blood. "Only be sure that thou eat not the blood; for the blood is the life; and thou mayest not eat the life with the flesh, Thou shalt not eat it; thou shalt pour it upon the earth as water. Thou shalt not eat it; that it may go well with thee, and with thy children after thee, when thou shalt do that which is right in the sight of the Lord."

Deuteronomy 12:23 tells us that "the blood is the life." Leviticus 17:11 says "the life of the flesh is in the blood." These two passages make quite clear what the meaning of blood is according to Scripture, and the latter verse ends with the words: "It is the blood that makes an atonement for the soul."

The blood of man is claimed by God; for the 'life is in the blood;' 'the blood is the life.' It therefore must not be eaten; if not offered in sacrifice it must be 'poured upon the earth as water.' "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed." The blood also maketh atonement for the soul: it must be poured out upon the altar. Gen. 9:4-6; Lev. 17:10-14; Deut. 12:23-25; Acts 15:29. In the O.T. dispensation everything in the tabernacle, the priests and their dresses were purged and sanctified by blood, everything being sprinkled with blood, including the book of the law and the people. Heb. 9:18, 21. This was typical of the blood of the Lord Jesus, which has accomplished everything for the Christian: with His blood He 'purchased' us, Acts 20:28; 'justified' us, Rom. 5:9; 'redeemed,' Eph. 1:7; 'sanctified,' Heb. 13:12; 'cleanseth us from all sin,' 1 John 1:7; etc.

And why is the blood made so prominent? Four times we read the word "blood" in verses 4-6. The book of Leviticus gives the answer. "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" (Lev. 17:11). The sanctity of the blood is here shown forth. Even the hunter in Israel had to keep it in view. "And whatsoever man there be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you which hunteth, or catcheth any beast or fowl that may be eaten; he shall even pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust. For it is the life of all flesh; the blood of it is for the life thereof, therefore I said to 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" (Lev. 17:13, 14). So the hunter had to stop, and pour out the blood. All points to the blood of the Lamb.

However, when the meat of animals was eaten, God firmly prohibited the blood being eaten with it (v. 4). From this time, the time that the eating of meat was first allowed, blood has been always forbidden. In every dispensation this has been true. The reason is that the blood is said to be “the life” of the creature, and life belongs exclusively to God. In refraining from eating blood then, we recognize the rights of the Creator. On the other hand, the rights of human beings were to be recognized. If a man or a beast shed human blood, then proper government demanded the death of that man or beast (v. 6). This also remains true throughout history.