What is the context?
The prohibition applies to Israelites and resident foreigners. Its stated reason is that life is in the blood and God has given blood on the altar for atonement. Even hunted edible animals require blood to be drained and covered with earth.
The law therefore joins the handling of blood with life and God’s provision. It does not treat blood as something people can use without regard to the giver of life, nor does it describe the physical substance as an independent power apart from His instruction.
How is this passage commonly understood?
Wesley reads the altar blood as pointing to Christ’s atoning blood. The USCCB note emphasizes the slaughterer’s liability for shedding life and the altar’s role in addressing that guilt. These are different emphases within the passage’s stated connection between life, blood, and atonement.
Christian applications of Acts 15:19–29, which also forbids blood, differ. The Council in Trullo, canon 67 explicitly retains the prohibition on eating blood. Augsburg Confession 28.65 reads the apostolic prohibition as temporary protection against offense rather than a permanent burden on conscience. The disagreement concerns the rule’s continuing application; this page does not originate a verdict.
What is our position?
We don't have a position on this passage yet. When our study reaches a conclusion the text supports, it will appear here.