Why did God prohibit eating meat with blood in it (Genesis 9:4)?

But if God now first gave every moving thing that lives to be food for man (Gen. 9:3), as freely as green herbage had been originally given to beast and bird and reptile (Gen. 1:30), there was marked restriction put on the blood. Of this man was not to eat (Gen. 9:4). It was the life, and this God reserved for Himself. The liberty for animal food to man's use made the divine claim more conspicuous. Life belonged to God; and woe be to those that despise or defy His rights. It is the condition of a fallen world, and God is a Preserver, or a Saviour, of all men as says the apostle, especially of those that believe. He governs in His providence. It is no longer the dominion given by the Creator. Now He licenses, and He prohibits.

For this reason God stringently guards human life and death. The very governing authority placed in man's hand would soon be misused and perverted by his will without the fear of God; and rivers of blood would flow, not merely through lawless corruption and violence as before the deluge, but by ambitious kings and governors after it. Therefore does God in His prescient wisdom and considerate goodness declare from the starting point of the new tenure, "Surely your blood [that is] of your lives will I require; at every animal's hand will I require it." Specially of course would He require the life of man at man's hand, even at the hand of each man's brother (Gen. 9:5). And this is set on its sacred and sound principle in Gen. 9:6; By man should his blood be shed who shed man's blood; for in God's image did He make man.

Here was a large grant, as wide as the scene which lay around him. He was monarch of all he surveyed, lord, like Adam in the garden, of the new world. Instructed, however, as well as honoured and enriched — taught that the blood of the animal was not to be eaten with its flesh: "the flesh with the blood thereof, which is the life thereof, thou shalt not eat" — a principle which involves all the thoughts and counsels of God in His way with sinners — as suited a prohibition, or limitation to the grant made to Noah now, as had been the prohibition of the tree in the midst of the garden, to the grant of all things else made to Adam.

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.

The way of God in the gospel was, therefore, rehearsed to Noah in this ordinance: "The flesh with the blood thereof, which is the life thereof, thou shalt not eat." His altar had already told us that he stood with Adam in the faith of the woman's Seed, and that that mystery was the principle of his religion and his worship. But here, while making over every thing to him for property, dominion, and use, the Lord will not pass by this great exception out of the grant; conveying, as it does, the great secret or principle of His gospel. In the changed circumstances of Adam and Noah, in the difference between an upright creature and a ruined sinner, this exception was as fitting and necessary, as I have said, as that of the tree of knowledge out of the grant of all with which the Lord, the Creator, had of old, furnished and filled the scene.

Thus did Jehovah impress on the heedless heart of man, that as human life was forfeited to God through sin, so He forbids the profane levity of turning the blood which is the natural life of earthly creatures into food. So had He enjoined after the deluge when liberty was first given to partake of flesh. The blood was strictly reserved for Himself. Even with natural animals, born to be taken and destroyed, and suitable for food, the claims of God must be maintained. This was long before the law, or even the fathers who had the promises. It was for those rescued from destruction, and standing on what Jehovah saw in the holocaust Noah offered on the altar. But when God thereon blessed Noah and his sons, who began the world that now is, while every moving thing that lived was now given for food as the green herb previously, "flesh with the life (or, blood) ye shall not eat." Man's life has a value attached to it never before declared; and the more because now for the first time it was for government responsible to God to vindicate. "And surely your blood, [the blood] of your lives, will I require." Even if a mere animal with no reasonable soul slew a human creature, this was no reason to pass it by. "At the hand of every animal will I require it; at the hand of man, even at the hand of every man's brother, will I require the life of man. Whoso sheds man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed, for in the image of God made he man" (Gen. 9:3-6).

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.

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.

Following close on the permission to eat flesh, comes the prohibition to eat blood (10-12). Not that this was anything new; for the Lord, who had given a full grant to Noah and to his sons, of all flesh for their food, withheld from them the blood. Now this is binding on all their descendants, even the whole race of man (Acts 15:20). In Genesis, however (9:4), no penalty was attached to the breaking of that command, a reason for it only was assigned, viz., that in it is the life of the flesh, so to eat of it would be virtually assuming that life belonged to the creature, whereas it belongs to God. In Leviticus a penalty is annexed to the infraction of the law by those who were therein commanded not to eat of it, and that penalty was death. "Whosoever 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." In Deuteronomy 12:25, the Lord reminds Israel of it afresh. The prohibition given in Genesis, the penalty announced in Leviticus, the blessing, if obedient to the command, is set before Israel in Deuteronomy: "That it may be well with thee, and with thy children after thee." Thus a prohibition to the whole race of man, was made a penal enactment only when given afresh to Israel. Truly, to be under law was no light matter. Yet there were advantages which, if obedient, Israel could enjoy, above any which Gentiles could expect.

In Israel, as we see in these verses, to eat blood was to provoke Jehovah's jealousy to the cutting off of the offender: Israelites or strangers sojourning among them made no difference. It denied man's obligation to own the forfeit of life to God: for God was to be owned solemnly, if not on the altar, at least by pouring out the blood on the earth as due to Him, instead of appropriating it to one's own gratification. Death was a serious thing; and Jehovah would not have it slighted, even when He allowed His people to partake of flesh that had been killed for their food. But He would have them, on penalty of their own death, honour His claim of the blood as the sign of life given up to God, and in no way for man to make his food.

But another reason is given to Israel why they should not eat blood. "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. Therefore I said to the children of Israel, no soul of you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger that sojourneth among you eat blood" (Lev. 17:11-12). It is interesting to observe the divine wisdom in choosing the time to make revelations of God's mind. The real atonement was just as much an event of the future, when Moses communicated this additional reason to Israel, as when the Lord spake to Noah and to his sons. But Noah and his sons could not have understood what then had not been demonstrated — the full need of atonement. Israel, however, with the laws concerning sacrifices before them, and the ordinance for the day of atonement fresh in their remembrance, could understand something of what atonement implied. So this additional reason given them for not eating blood comes in in its right order just after the directions for the day of atonement.

Life belongs to God, so no one of the human race was to eat blood. The sinner, too, has forfeited his life, and can only live before God on the ground of the death of a sacrifice as a substitute. This Israel were ever to remember. But if forbidden the blood, they were reminded how that could speak to God on their behalf. The blood maketh an atonement for the soul. The blood shed, the life is given up to God, and that is precious to Him. No wonder, then, that bloodshedding formed such an essential part of the Mosaic ritual, for it spoke to God of the life of the Lord Jesus Christ, His only begotten Son, given up to Him on the cross. Do any object to the truth of atonement by blood, as painting the God who teaches us of it in hideous colours, as they would term it? We would ask, if they have ever given to this chapter of Leviticus the attention which it deserves? For when we learn what blood is in God's eyes, that in which is the life of the flesh, we see why He could delight in the blood of His Son, the witness of that self surrender, even to death, which must be so precious to Him. Of three important truths, then, the prohibition to eat blood reminds us. We are creatures, and must remember it. We were by nature sinners, and are to acknowledge it. We are indebted wholly to God for atonement by blood, and are ever to own it. Hence it is all of grace that atonement could be, and has been, effected. For the words of Jehovah are these, "I have given it (the blood) to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls." The One to whom life belongs has given it to be poured out for our everlasting blessing.

But the blood was universally interdicted to the people who knew, as none others did of old, that life belongs to God. It mattered not what the animal might be, fowl or beast, all was forbidden absolutely. "And ye shall eat no blood, of fowl or of beast, in any of your dwellings: whatever soul [it be] that eats any manner of blood shall be cut off from his peoples." It denied the rights of God, the Creator; and if man forfeited his by sin, Jehovah maintained His title over it unimpaired. He instituted government by man in the first place to take cognisance of death by violent intent. Shed blood is its sign, and it belongs to God exclusively; man has no title to appropriate it. So we see that, long after the Holy Spirit was given, and Gentile freedom from circumcision was insisted on, eating of blood was still prohibited, as well as personal purity enjoined. The Christian is the last who should make light of a "faithful Creator." The principles laid down for Noah are not Jewish statutes, and subsist: so the apostles decided in Acts 15.

The rest of Leviticus 17 is occupied with regulations as to eating. The blood, neither of beast nor fowl, was to be eaten for it is the life of the creature, and life belongs to God. This enactment specially enforced for Israel what had been laid down in the time of Noah after the flood, as recorded in Genesis 9:4. So when the apostles and elders gave this injunction to Gentile believers, as recorded in Acts 15:20 and 29, they were not imposing upon them what was merely an item of the law of Moses, but rather a prohibition that applies to mankind generally. We do well to observe it, though we do not need to observe the extreme scruples of the Jews, as is shown by the instruction of 1 Corinthians 10:25.