PDA

View Full Version : Meat, 'lifeblood', and dietary proscriptions



Maria Murray
01-04-2008, 05:11 PM
I am looking for patristic references or any sources that would help me better understand the relationship between the people being allowed to eat meat after the flood yet being prohibited to eat flesh with its "lifeblood" (Genesis 9:4) and with John 6:53 ("unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you"). I think St. John Chrysostom wrote something about that, but I cannot find it.

Why were humans permitted to eat meat at that point?
Why could they not eat it with its lifeblood?
Is this directly related to the Eucharist, meaning that the only blood we're allowed to drink is that of the Son of Man?
Are there any other scriptural references to lifeblood?

Michael Stickles
01-04-2008, 06:38 PM
I am looking for patristic references or any sources that would help me better understand the relationship between the people being allowed to eat meat after the flood yet being prohibited to eat flesh with its "lifeblood" (Genesis 9:4) and with John 6:53 ("unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you"). I think St. John Chrysostom wrote something about that, but I cannot find it.

... Are there any other scriptural references to lifeblood?

The other Scriptural references I know of are in Leviticus 17:10-14 and Deuteronomy 12:20-28. In the Leviticus passage, God states that the reason the Israelites were not to eat the blood was that "... the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one's life."

St. John Chrysostom wrote commentary on John 6:53 and surrounding verses in his 46th (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/240146.htm) and 47th (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/240147.htm) homilies on the Gospel of John, but he doesn't really cover the OT concept of "lifeblood" there in any depth, though there are some allusions in the bottom part of the 46th homily. He may have done so elsewhere, but I haven't read too many of his writings.

In Christ,
Mike