Blood

VIEW:57 DATA:01-04-2020

BLOOD.—Among all primitive races the blood, especially of human beings, has been and is regarded with superstitious, or rather, to be just, religious awe. By the Hebrews also blood was Invested with peculiar sanctity as the seat of the soul (nephesh), that is of the principle of life (Lev_17:11 ‘the life [Heb. nephesh] of the flesh is in the blood’). From this fundamental conception of blood as the vehicle of life may be derived all the manifold social and religious beliefs and practices with regard to it, which play so large a part in Scripture. See Atonement, Clean and Unclean, Covenant, Food, Propitiation, Sacrifice.
A. R. S. Kennedy.
Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible
Edited by James Hastings, D.D. Published in 1909

Forbidden to be eaten (Gen_9:4) under the Old Testament, on the ground that "the life (soul) of the flesh (the soul which gives life to the flesh) is in the blood," and that "God gave it upon the altar to make atonement with for men's souls" (Lev_17:11). Translate the next clause, "for the blood maketh atonement by virtue of the soul." The blood, not in itself, but as the vehicle of the soul, atones, because the animal soul was offered to God on the altar as a. substitute for the human soul. Now that Christ's one, and only true, sacrifice has superseded animal sacrifices, the prohibition against eating blood ceases, the decree in Acts 15 being but temporary, not to offend existing Jewish prejudices needlessly. In Lev_3:17 the "fat" is forbidden as well as the blood. God reserved the blood to Himself, investing it with a sacramental sanctity, when allowing man animal food. Besides the atoning virtue it typically had, it brought a curse when not duly expiated, as by burial (Gen_9:4; Lev_17:13).
The blood of victims was caught by the priest in a basin, and sprinkled seven times (that of birds was squeezed out at once) on the altar, its four corners or horns, on its side above and below the line running round it, or on the mercy-seat, according to the nature of the offering; the blood of the Passover lamb on the lintel and doorposts (Exodus 12; Lev_4:5-7; Lev_16:14-19). A drain from the temple carried the blood into the brook Kedron. A land was regarded as polluted by blood shed on it, which was to be expiated only by the blood of the murderer, and not by any "satisfaction" (Gen_4:10; Gen_9:4-6; Heb_12:24; Num_35:31; Num_35:33; Psa_106:38). The guilt of bloodshed, if the shedder was not known, fell on the city nearest by measurement, until it exculpated itself, its elders washing their hands over an expiatory sacrifice, namely, a beheaded heifer in a rough, unplowed, and unsown valley (Deu_21:1-9).
The blood and water from Jesus' side, when pierced after death, was something extraordinary; for in other corpses the blood coagulates, and the water does not flow clear. The "loud voice" just before death (Luk_23:46) shows that He did not die from mere exhaustion. The psalmist, His typical forerunner, says (Psa_69:20), "reproach hath broken my heart." Crucifixion alone would not have killed Him in so short a time. Probably the truth is, if we may with reverence conjecture from hints in Scripture, that mental agony, when He hung under the Father's displeasure at our sins which He bore, caused rupture of the pericardium, or sac wherein the heart throbs. The extravasated blood separated into the crassamentum and serum, the blood and the water, and flowed out when the soldier's spear pierced the side.
Hence appears the propriety of Heb_10:19-20, "having boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way which He hath consecrated for us through the veil (which was 'rent' at His death), that is to say His flesh." Also, "this is My body which is broken for you" (1Co_11:24) is explained by the breaking of the heart, though it was true "a bone of Him shall not be broken" (Joh_19:32-27); compare also 1Jn_5:6, "this is He that came by water (at His baptism by John in Jordan) and blood" (by His bloody baptism, at Calvary).
THE AVENGING OF BLOOD by the nearest kinsman of the deceased was a usage from the earliest historical times (Gen_9:5-6; Gen_34:30; 2Sa_14:7). Among the Bedouin Arabs the thar, or law of blood, comes into effect if the offer of money satisfaction be refused. So among the Anglo-Saxons the wer-gild, or money satisfaction for homicide, varying in amount according to the rank, was customary. The Mosaic law mitigated the severity of the law of private revenge for blood, by providing six cities of refuge (among the 48 Levitical cities), three on one side of Jordan, three on the other, for the involuntary homicide to flee into. The avenger, or goel (derived from a Hebrew root "pollution," implying that he was deemed polluted until the blood of his slain kinsman was expiated), was nearest of kin to the man slain, and was bound to take vengeance on the manslayer.
If the latter reached one of the six cities, (Kedesh in Naphtali, Shechem in mount Ephraim, Hebron in the hill country of Judah, W. of Jordan; Bezor in Reuben, Ramoth in Gilead (Gad), Golan in Manasseh, E. of Jordan,) he was safe until the elders of the city, and then those of his own city, decided whether it was an involuntary act. In this case he was kept safe from the avenger in the city of refuge, so long as he did not go 2,000 cubits beyond its precincts. After the high priest's death he might return home in safety (Num_35:25; Num_35:28; Jos_20:4-6). The roads were to be kept clear, that nothing might retard the flight of the manslayer, to whom every moment was precious (Deu_19:3). Jewish tradition adds that posts inscribed "Refuge," "Refuge," were to be set up at the cross roads. All necessaries of water, etc., were in the cities.
No implements of war were allowed there. The law of retaliation in blood affected only the manslayer, and not also (as among pagan nations) his relatives (Deu_24:16). Blood revenge still prevails in Corsica. The law of blood avenging by the nearest kinsman, though incompatible with our ideas in a more civilized age and nation, is the means of preventing much bloodshed among the Arabs; and its introduction into the law of Israel, a kindred race, accords with the provisional character of the whole Mosaic system, which establishes not what is absolutely best, supposing a state of optimism, but what was best under existing circumstances. Moreover, it contained an important typical lesson, hinted at in Heb_6:18; Heb_2:14-15.
The Son of man, as He to whom the Father hath committed all judgment, is the goel or avenger of blood on guilty man, involved by Satan the "murderer from the beginning" in murderous rebellion against God. He, in another sense, is the goel or redeemer of man, as the high priest whose death sets the shut up captive free; He is also the priestly city of refuge (His priestly office being the mean of our salvation), by fleeing into which man is safe; but in this latter sense, as our High priest "ever liveth," we must not only eater the city, and moreover abide in Him, but also abide in Him forever for eternal safety (Joh_15:1-11). "The way" to Him is clearly pointed out by God Himself (Isa_30:21). "Turn you to the stronghold, ye prisoners of hope" (Zec_9:12) Once in Christ, He can defy avenging justice (Rom_8:33-34).
Fausset's Bible Dictionary
By Andrew Robert Fausset, co-Author of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown's 1888.

Blood. To blood, is ascribed in Scripture, the mysterious sacredness which belongs to life, and God reserved it to himself, when allowing man the dominion over and the use of the lower animals for food. Thus reserved, it acquires a double power:
(1) that of sacrificial atonement; and
(2) that of becoming a curse when wantonly shed, unless duly expiated. Gen_9:4; Lev_7:26; Lev_17:11-13.
Smith's Bible Dictionary
By Dr. William Smith.Published in 1863

Beside its proper sense, the fluid of the veins of men and animals, the term in Scripture is used,
1. For life. “God will require the blood of a man,” he will punish murder in what manner soever committed. “His blood be upon us,” let the guilt of his death be imputed to us. “The voice of thy brother's blood crieth;” the murder committed on him crieth for vengeance. “The avenger of blood;”
he who is to avenge the death of his relative, Num_35:24; Num_35:27.
2. Blood means relationship, or consanguinity.
3. Flesh and blood are placed in opposition to a superior nature: “Flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father who is in heaven,”
Mat_16:17.
4. They are also opposed to the glorified body; “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God,” 1Co_15:50.
5. They are opposed also to evil spirits: “We wrestle not against flesh and blood,” against visible enemies composed of flesh and blood, “but against principalities and powers,” &c, Eph_6:12.
6. Wine is called the pure blood of the grape: “Judah shall wash his garments in the blood of the grape,” Gen_49:11; Deu_32:14.
7. The priests were established by God to judge between blood and blood; that is, in criminal matters, and where the life of man is at stake;—to determine whether the murder be casual, or voluntary; whether a crime deserve death, or admit of remission, &c.
8. In its most eminent sense blood is used for the sacrificial death of Christ; whose blood or death is the price of our salvation. His blood has “purchased the church,” Act_20:28. “We are justified by his blood,”
Rom_5:9 “We have redemption through his blood,” Eph_1:7, &c. See ATONEMENT.
That singular and emphatic prohibition of blood for food from the earliest times, which we find in the Holy Scriptures, deserves particular attention. God expressly forbade the eating of blood alone, or of blood mixed with the flesh of animals, as when any creature was suffocated, or strangled, or killed without drawing its blood from the carcass. For when the grant of animal food was made to Noah, in those comprehensive words, “Even as the green herb have I given you all things,” it was added, “but flesh with the life thereof, namely, its blood, ye shall not eat” Gen_9:4. And when the law was given to the children of Israel, we find the prohibition against the eating of blood still more explicitly enforced, both upon Jews and Gentiles, in the following words, “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: 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 an atonement for the soul,”
Lev_17:10-11. And to cut off all possibility of mistake upon this particular point, it is added: “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 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, 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,” Lev_17:12-14. This restraint, than which nothing can be more express, was also, under the new covenant, enjoined upon believing Gentiles, as “a burden” which “it seemed necessary to the Holy Spirit to impose upon them,” Act_15:28-29. For this prohibition no moral reason seems capable of being offered; nor does it clearly appear that blood is an unwholesome aliment, which some think was the physical reason of its being inhibited; and if, in fact, blood is deleterious as food, there seems no greater reason why this should be pointed out by special revelation to man, to guard him against injury, than many other unwholesome ailments. There is little force in the remark, that the eating of blood produces a ferocious disposition; for those nations that eat strangled things, or blood cooked with other ailments, do not exhibit more ferocity than others. The true reason was, no doubt, a sacrificial one. When animals were granted to Noah for food, the blood was reserved; and when the same law was reenacted among the Israelites, the original prohibition is repeated, with an explanation which at once shows the original ground upon which it rested: “I have given it upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls.” From this “additional reason,” as it has been called, it has been argued, that the doctrine of the atoning power of blood was new, and was, then, for the first time, announced by Moses, or the same cause for the prohibition would have been assigned to Noah. To this we may reply,
1. That unless the same reason be supposed as the ground of the prohibition of blood to Noah, as that given by Moses to the Jews, no reason at all can be conceived for this restraint being put upon the appetite of mankind from Noah to Moses; and yet we have a prohibition of a most solemn kind, which in itself could have no reason, enjoined without any external reason being either given or conceivable.
2. That it is a mistake to suppose that the declaration of Moses to the Jews, that God had “given them the blood for an atonement,” is an “additional reason” for the interdict, not to be found in the original prohibition to Noah. The whole passage occurs in Leviticus 17; and the great reason there given of the prohibition of blood is, that it is “the life;” and what follows respecting “atonement,” is exegetical of this reason;—the life is in the blood, and the blood or life is given as an atonement. Now, by turning to the original prohibition in Genesis, we find that precisely the same reason is given: “But the flesh with the blood, which is the life thereof, shall ye not eat.” The reason, then, being the same, the question is, whether the exegesis added by Moses must not necessarily be understood in the general reason given for the restraint to Noah. Blood is prohibited because it is the life; and Moses adds, that it is “the blood,” or life, “which makes atonement.” Let any one attempt to discover any reason for the prohibition of blood to Noah, in the mere circumstance that it is “the life,” and he will find it impossible. It is no reason at all, moral or instituted, except that as it was LIFE SUBSTITUTED FOR LIFE, the life of the animal in sacrifice for the life of man, and that, therefore, blood had a sacred appropriation. The manner, too, in which Moses introduces the subject, is indicative that, though he was renewing a prohibition, he was not publishing a new doctrine; he does not teach his people that God had then given, or appointed, blood to make atonement; but he prohibits them from eating it, because he had already made this appointment, without reference to time, and as a subject with which they were familiar. Because the blood was the life, it was sprinkled upon, and poured out at, the altar: and we have in the sacrifice of the paschal lamb, and the sprinkling of its blood, a sufficient proof that, before the giving of the law, not only was blood not eaten, but was appropriated to a sacred sacrificial purpose. Nor was this confined to the Jews; it was customary with the Romans and Greeks, who, in like manner, poured out and sprinkled the blood of victims at their altars; a rite derived, probably, from the Egyptians, who deduced it, not from Moses, but from the sons of Noah. The notion, indeed, that the blood of the victims was peculiarly sacred to the gods, is impressed upon all ancient Pagan mythology.
Biblical and Theological Dictionary by Richard Watson
PRINTER 1849.

The special significance of blood in the Bible is that it commonly signifies death; not death through natural causes, but death through killing or violence. In the language of the Bible, anyone responsible for the death of another has upon him the blood of the dead person, and the one who executes the guilty avenges the blood of the dead person (Num_35:19; 1Ki_2:32-33; 1Ki_2:37; Mat_27:4; Mat_27:24-25; Act_5:28; Rev_6:10; Rev_17:6). Likewise those who lay down their lives for others are, so to speak, offering their own blood (2Sa_23:15-17; Rom_5:6-9).
The life of the flesh
Blood has this special significance because ‘the life of the flesh is in the blood’ (Gen_9:4; Lev_17:11; Deu_12:23). However, the Bible’s emphasis is not on blood circulating through the body, but on shed blood; not on blood’s chemical properties, but on its symbolic significance. Since blood in the body represents life, shed blood represents life poured out; that is, death.
One of the principles on which Israelite law was based was that all physical life belonged to God and was therefore precious in his sight. This was particularly so in the case of human life, because men and women are made in God’s image (Gen_1:26). Any person who killed another without God’s approval was considered no longer worthy to enjoy God’s gift of life and had to be executed. In this case the executioner was not guilty of wrongdoing, because he was acting with God’s approval. He was carrying out God’s judgment (Gen_9:5-6). Therefore, until a murderer was punished, the blood of the murdered person cried out for justice (Gen_4:10; Num_35:33; Deu_19:11-13).
Animal life also belonged to God. God allowed the flesh of animals to be a source of food for human beings, but in the law he set out for Israel, those who took an animal’s life had to acknowledge God as the rightful owner of that life. They took the animal’s life only by God’s permission. Therefore, they poured out the animal’s blood (representing the life that had been taken) either on the altar or on the ground. This was an expression of sacrificial thanks to God for benefits received at the cost of the animal’s life. Any drinking of the blood was strictly forbidden (Gen_9:4; Lev_17:3-7; Lev_17:10-14; Lev_19:26; Deu_12:15-16; Deu_12:20-28).
The blood of atonement
Because of this connection between shed blood and life laid down, God gave the blood of sacrificial animals to his people as a way of atonement. Their sin made them guilty before God, and the penalty was death. But God in his mercy provided a way for repentant sinners to come to him and have their sins forgiven, while at the same time the penalty for their sin was carried out. An animal was killed in their place. People received forgiveness through the animal’s blood; that is, through the animal’s death on their behalf (Lev_17:11; see ATONEMENT; SACRIFICE).
This symbolic significance of blood was clearly illustrated at the time of the Passover in Egypt. The sprinkling of the blood around the door was a sign that an animal had died in the place of the person who was under judgment. The firstborn was saved through the death of an innocent substitute (Exo_12:13).
The blood of Christ
Human beings live in a body of flesh that is kept alive by the blood that circulates through it. Therefore, when Jesus became a human being he took upon himself the nature of ‘flesh and blood’ (Heb_2:14; Heb_5:7; cf. Mat_16:17; Gal_1:16; Eph_6:12). All humankind was, because of sin, under the penalty of death; but when Jesus Christ died on the cross in the sinner’s place, he made salvation possible. He broke the power of sin through his own blood (Act_20:28; Eph_1:7; Tit_2:14; Rev_1:5; Rev_5:9).
In the New Testament the expressions ‘blood of the cross’, ‘blood of Christ’ and ‘death of Christ’ are often used interchangeably (Rom_5:7-9; Eph_2:13; Eph_2:16; Col_1:20; Col_1:22). To have life through Christ’s blood means to have life through his death. There is no suggestion of using Christ’s blood in any way that might be likened to the modern practice of a blood transfusion. Christ did not give his blood in the sense of a blood donor who helps overcome some lack in another person. He gave his blood through dying to bear the penalty of sin (Rom_3:24-25; Col_1:14; 1Pe_2:24; 1Jn_1:7). Those who ‘share in Christ’s blood’ share in the benefits of his death through receiving forgiveness of sins and eternal life (Joh_6:54-58; 1Co_10:16).
The book of Revelation uses the symbolism of Christ’s blood in relation to the presence in heaven of those killed for the sake of Christ. Yet their fitness to appear in God’s presence is because of Christ’s sacrifice, not theirs. They are cleansed through Christ’s blood. This does not mean that they are washed in blood in the sense that clothes are washed in water, but that they are cleansed from sin through Christ’s atoning death (Rev_7:14; cf. 1Pe_1:2; 1Jn_1:7).
Under the Old Testament system people’s access to God was limited. Once a year, on the Day of Atonement, the high priest, and he alone, could enter the Most Holy Place, the symbol of God’s presence. Even then, he could enter the divine presence only by taking with him the blood of a sacrificial animal and sprinkling it on and in front of the mercy seat. This blood was a sign of a life laid down in atonement for sin, so that the barrier to God’s presence through sin might be removed (Leviticus 16; Heb_9:7; Heb_9:25; for details of the ritual see DAY OF ATONEMENT).
But Christ, the great high priest, entered the heavenly presence of God, not with his blood but through his blood. He entered by means of his death. Christ has no need to carry out blood rituals in heaven, for he has already put away sin by the sacrifice of himself (Heb_9:12; Heb_9:24-26). Just as he entered God’s holy presence through his blood, so his people can have boldness to enter by the same blood. They claim for themselves the benefits of his death (Heb_10:19).
Bridgeway Bible Dictionary by Don Fleming
PRINTER 1990.

blud (דּם, dām, probably from אדם, 'ādham ?to be red?; αἷμα, haı́ma): Used in the Old Testament to designate the life principle in either animal or vegetable, as the blood of man or the juice of the grape (Lev_17:11, et al.); in the New Testament for the blood of an animal, the atoning blood of Christ, and in both Old Testament and New Testament in a figurative sense for bloodshed or murder (Gen_37:26; Hos_4:2; Rev_16:6).
1. Primitive Ideas
Although the real function of the blood in the human system was not fully known until the fact of its circulation was established by William Harvey in 1615, nevertheless from the earliest times a singular mystery has been attached to it by all peoples. Blood rites, blood ceremonies and blood feuds are common among primitive tribes. It came to be recognized as the life principle long before it was scientifically proved to be. Naturally a feeling of fear, awe and reverence would be attached to the shedding of blood. With many uncivilized peoples scarification of the body until blood flows is practiced. Blood brotherhood or blood friendship is established by African tribes by the mutual shedding of blood and either drinking it or rubbing it on one another's bodies. Thus and by the inter-transfusion of blood by other means it was thought that a community of life and interest could be established.
2. Hebrew and Old Testament Customs
Notwithstanding the ignorance and superstition surrounding this suggestively beautiful idea, it grew to have more than a merely human significance and application. For this crude practice of inter-transference of human blood there came to be a symbolic substitution of animal blood in sprinkling or anointing. The first reference in the Old Testament to blood (Gen_4:10) is figurative, but highly illustrative of the reverential fear manifested upon the shedding of blood and the first teaching regarding it.
The rite of circumcision is an Old Testament form of blood ceremony. Apart from the probable sanitary importance of the act is the deeper meaning in the establishment of a bond of friendship between the one upon whom the act is performed and Yahweh Himself. In order that Abraham might become ?the friend of God? he was commanded that he should be circumcised as a token of the covenant between him and God (Gen_17:10-11; see CIRCUMCISION).
It is significant that the eating of blood was prohibited in earliest Bible times (Gen_9:4). The custom probably prevailed among heathen nations as a religious rite (compare Psa_16:4). This and its unhygienic influence together doubtless led to its becoming taboo. The same prohibition was made under the Mosaic code (Lev_7:26; see SACRIFICE).
Blood was commanded to be used also for purification or for ceremonial cleansing (Lev_14:5-7, Lev_14:51, Lev_14:52; Num_19:4), provided, however, that it be taken from a clean animal (see PURIFICATION).
In all probability there is no trace of the superstitious use of blood in the Old Testament, unless perchance in 1Ki_22:38 (see BATHING); but everywhere it is vested with cleansing, expiatory, and reverently symbolic qualities.
3. New Testament Teachings
As in the transition from ancient to Hebrew practice, so from the Old Testament to the New Testament we see an exaltation of the conception of blood and blood ceremonies. In Abraham's covenant his own blood had to be shed. Later an expiatory animal was to shed blood (Lev_5:6; see ATONEMENT), but there must always be a shedding of blood. ?Apart from shedding of blood there is no remission? (Heb_9:22). The exaltation and dignifying of this idea finds its highest development then in the vicarious shedding of blood by Christ Himself (1Jo_1:7). As in the Old Testament ?blood? was also used to signify the juice of grapes, the most natural substitute for the drinking of blood would be the use of wine. Jesus takes advantage of this, and introduces the beautiful and significant custom (Mat_26:28) of drinking wine and eating bread as symbolic of the primitive intertransfusion of blood and flesh in a pledge of eternal friendship (compare Exo_24:6, Exo_24:7; Joh_6:53-56). This is the climactic observance of blood rites recorded in the Bible.
Literature
Trumbull, The Blood Covenant and The Threshold Covenant; Westermarck, The Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas; Robertson Smith, Lectures on the Religion of the Semites.
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
PRINTER 1915.

There are two respects in which the ordinances of the Old and New Testaments concerning blood deserve notice here?the prohibition of its use as an article of food, and the appointment and significance of its use in the ritual of sacrifice; both of which appear to rest on a common ground.
In Gen_9:4, where the use of animal food is allowed, it is first absolutely forbidden to eat 'flesh with its soul, its blood;' which expression, were it otherwise obscure, is explained by the mode in which the same terms are employed in Deu_12:23. In the Mosaic law the prohibition is repeated with frequency and emphasis although it is generally introduced in connection with sacrifices, as in Lev_3:17; Lev_7:26; Lev_17:10-14; Lev_19:26; Deu_12:16-23; Deu_15:23. In cases where the prohibition is introduced in connection with the lawful and unlawful articles of diet, the reason which is generally assigned in the text is, that 'the blood is the soul;' and it is ordered that it be poured on the ground like water. But where it is introduced in reference to the portions of the victim which were to be offered to the Lord, then the text, in addition to the former reason, insists that 'the blood expiates by the soul' (Lev_17:11-12). This strict injunction not only applied to the Israelites, but even to the strangers residing among them. The penalty assigned to its transgression was the being 'cut off from the people;' by which the punishment of death appears to be intended (cf. Heb_10:28), although it is difficult to ascertain whether it was inflicted by the sword or by stoning. To this is to be added, that the Apostles and elders, assembled in council at Jerusalem, when desirous of settling the extent to which the ceremonial observances were binding upon the converts to Christianity, renewed the injunction to abstain from blood, and coupled it with things offered to idols (Act_15:29).
In direct opposition to this emphatic prohibition of blood in the Mosaic law, the customs of uncivilized heathens sanctioned the cutting of slices from the living animal, and the eating of the flesh while quivering with life and dripping with blood. Even Saul's army committed this barbarity, as we read in 1Sa_14:32; and the prophet also lays it to the charge of the Jews in Eze_33:25. This practice, according to Bruce's testimony, exists at present among the Abyssinians. Moreover, pagan religions, and that of the Phoenicians among the rest, appointed the eating and drinking of blood, mixed with wine, as a rite of idolatrous worship, and especially in the ceremonial of swearing. To this the passage in Psa_16:4, appears to allude.
The appointment and significance of the use of blood in the ritual of sacrifice belongs indeed to this head; but their further notice will be more appropriately pursued in the article: Sacrifices.
The Popular Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature
by John Kitto.

Gen_4:10 (c) This is symbolical of the death of Abel by the hand of Cain, his brother. The actual blood shed by Abel and lying on the ground called loudly for the punishment of the murderer.

Exo_12:13 (a) Here is a proof that those in the house had believed GOD's Word and had offered the proper sacrifice. The lamb and its blood are types of CHRIST and His Blood. (See 1Co_5:7).

Lev_20:9 (a) Here is pictured the fact that GOD will fasten upon the guilty person his guilt and his punishment. The lawbreaker shall receive the due reward of his deeds. (See also Lev_20:13 and Lev_20:27; Eze_18:13; Eze_33:5).

Deu_17:8 (a) The words used here refer to relatives who are quarreling among themselves. Those of the same blood are brought before the judgment seat for the adjustment of their difficulties. (See 2Ch_19:10).

Job_16:18 (a) Job is making a call for a great inventory of his own life. He is inviting an investigation of his own character. He is really asserting that he has lived a righteous life.

Psa_58:10 (b) This is a description of the joy of GOD's people when the wicked are conquered and the enemy is under the feet of the Lord. (See also Psa_68:23).

Isa_1:15 (a) Probably this is a figure which describes the guilt of these people in murdering their fellowmen and murdering their children for idol worship.

Eze_16:6 (a) This probably refers to the early days of Israel's history in the time of Abraham followed by the times of Isaac and Jacob. The nation was formed with difficulty and trouble which is compared to the birth of a baby whereby blood is shed.

Joe_2:31 (c) It is not clearly understood whether the moon will actually become red, or whether men because of strained eyes see the moon as red, or whether the tumult of earth's sorrows changes man's vision. Evidently it refers to a time of great and miraculous happenings because of the powerful operation of the Spirit of GOD in human affairs. (See also Rev_6:12; Rev_8:8; Rev_16:3).

Mat_16:17 (a) This represents human reasonings, philosophies and deductions or conclusions. Nothing within the human heart or mind ever reveals anything of GOD or of the Deity of CHRIST.

Joh_1:13 (a) This is a definite statement that no one becomes a child of GOD because of his parents, or through any blood stream. Salvation or Christianity is not passed down to the children through the blood stream of the father or the mother. Each child and each relative must experience the will and the power of GOD in his own personal case in order to become a child of GOD. This relationship only comes about through personal faith in JESUS CHRIST.

Joh_6:54 (a) The blood in this case is a type or a picture of the life and death of CHRIST and the Person of CHRIST appropriated by the believer for salvation. It represents the receiving by faith of the sacrifice of CHRIST for forgiveness and cleansing. It is a figure of speech which we commonly use when one expresses his love for another by saying, "I could eat you up." Sometimes the expression is used, "I lapped it up as a cat laps milk." The thought is the same. The believer embraces by faith with no question or doubt the value of the person of CHRIST and the efficacy of His work for our souls. See also 1Co_11:25-26.

Act_17:26 (a) This blood is a type or a symbol of the universal character of human beings as distinguished from all animal life. All human beings are made of the same kind of blood. It is different from animal blood, but it is always human blood. This links all human beings together as a separate group from all the animal creation and proves the fallacy and the false character of the hypothesis of "evolution."

Act_20:26 (a) The word in this case is used to represent the fact that Paul would not be held responsible for the death, the second death, of any of those whom he had contacted in his travels and preaching. The appearance of blood indicates death. Paul so preached CHRIST and the Gospel that none of those who heard His Word need never die in their sins and be sent to the Lake of Fire, which is the second death. Paul felt that he had completely cleared himself of all responsibility in connection with the salvation of those people.

1Jo_1:7 (a) The blood here represents the sacrifice of CHRIST at Calvary with all the saving power connected with it. When we believe in and trust the Lord JESUS CHRIST, GOD and CHRIST apply His sacrifice to our record of sins, and to ourselves in order to blot out all these sins and iniquities. GOD has made a "blood bank." Any person who believes in and accepts the Lord JESUS CHRIST may and does receive the benefits of that precious blood.

Rev_14:20 (c) This is a picture of the complete victory of the Lord JESUS over all His enemies and the vindication as well as the culmination of the wrath of GOD against all His opponents.

Rev_17:6 (b) This blood represents the death of multitudes who have been slain by this wicked church under the guise of serving GOD. That evil monster, the apostate church, was and is responsible for the death of many thousands of true believers who were burned at the stake, tortured in cages, torn by the rack, and otherwise killed by extremely cruel means. This church reveled in this carnage, and still rejoices in every opportunity to injure and destroy true believers in the Lord JESUS CHRIST. (See also Rev_18:24).
Wilson's Dictionary of Bible Types
press 1957.

Blood
(דָּם, dam; αϊvμα: both occasionally used, by Hebraism, in the plural with a sing. sense), the red fluid circulating in the veins of men and animals. The term is employed in Scripture in a variety of senses.
1. As Food. — To blood is ascribed in Scripture the mysterious sacredness which belongs to life, and God reserved it to Himself when allowing man the dominion over and the use of the lower animals for food, etc. (See Thomson, Land and Book, i, 136.) In Gen_9:4, where the use of animal food is allowed, it is first absolutely forbidden to eat "flesh with its soul, its blood;" which expression, were it otherwise obscure, is explained by the mode in which the same terms are employed in Deu_12:23. In the Mosaic law the prohibition is repeated with frequency and emphasis, although it is generally introduced in connection with sacrifices, as in Lev_3:7; Lev_7:26 (in both which places blood is coupled in the prohibition with the fat of the victims); 17:10-14; 19:2; Deu_12:16-23; Deu_15:23. In cases where the prohibition is introduced in connection with the lawful and unlawful articles of diet, the reason which is generally assigned in the text is that " the blood is the soul," and it is ordered that it be poured on the ground like water. But where it is introduced in reference to the portions of the victim which were to be offered to the Lord, then the text, in addition to the former reason, insists that "the blood expiates by the soul" (Lev_17:11; Leviticus 12). This strict injunction not only applied to the Israelites, but even to the strangers residing among them. The penalty assigned to its transgression was the being "cut off from the people," by which the punishment of death appears to be intended (comp. Heb_10:28), although it is difficult to ascertain whether it was inflicted by the sword or by stoning. It is observed by Michaelis (iMos. Recht. 4:45) that the blood of fishes does not appear to be interdicted. The words in Lev_7:26, only expressly mention that of birds and cattle. This accords, however, with the reasons assigned for the prohibition of blood, inasmuch as fishes could not be offered to the Lord, although they formed a significant offering in heathen religions. To this is to be added that the apostles and elders, assembled in council at Jerusalem, when desirous of settling the extent to which the ceremonial observances were binding upon the converts to Christianity, renewed the injunction to abstain from blood, and coupled it with things offered to idols (Act_15:29). It is perhaps worthy of notice here that Mohammed, while professing to abrogate some of the dietary restrictions of the Jewish law (which he asserts were imposed on account of the sins of the Jews, Sura 4:158). still enforces, among others, abstinence from blood and from things offered to idols (Koran, Sur. v, 4; 6:146, ed. Flugel).
In direct opposition to this emphatic prohibition of blood in the Mosaic law, the customs of uncivilized heathens sanctioned the cutting of slices from the living animal, and the eating of the flesh while quivering with life and dripping with blood. Even Saul's army committed this barbarity, as we read in 1Sa_14:32; and the prophet also lays it to the charge of the Jews in Eze_33:25. This practice, according to Bruce's testimony, exists at present among the Abyssinians. Moreover, pagan religions, and that of the Phoenicians among the rest, appointed the eating and drinking of blood, mixed with wine, as a rite of idolatrous worship, and especially in the ceremonial of swearing. To this the passage in Psa_16:4 appears to allude (comp. Michaelis, Critisth. Colleg. p. 108, where several testimonies on this subject are collected).
Among Christians different views have been entertained respecting the eating of blood, some maintaining that its prohibition in the Scriptures is to be regarded as merely ceremonial and temporary, while others contend that it is unlawful under any circumstances, and that Christians are as much bound to abstain from it now as were the Jews under the Mosaic economy. This they found on the facts that when animal food was originally granted to man, there was an express reservation in the article of the blood; that this grant was made to the new parents of the whole human family after the flood, consequently the tenure by which any of mankind are permitted to eat animals is in every case accompanied with this restriction; that there never was any reversal of the prohibition; that most express injunctions were given on the point in the Jewish code; and that in the New Testament, instead of there being the least hint intimating that we are freed from the obligation, it is deserving of particular notice that at the very time when the Holy Spirit declares by the apostles (Acts 15) that the Gentiles are free from the yoke of circumcision, abstinence from blood is explicitly enjoined, and the action thus prohibited is classed with idolatry and fornication. After the time of Augustine the rule began to be held merely as a temporary injunction. It was one of the grounds alleged by the early apologists against the calumnies of the enemies of Christianity that, so far were they from drinking human blood, it was unlawful for them to drink the blood even of irrational animals. Numerous testimonies to the same effect are found in after ages (Bingham, Orig. Eccl., bk. 17:ch. v, § 20). SEE FOOD.
2. Sacrificial. — It was a well-established rabbinical maxim (Mishna, Yoma, v, 1; Menachoth, xciii, 2) that the blood of a victim is essential to atonement (כפרה אלא בדם אין, i.e. "there is no expiation except by blood"), a principle recognised by the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews (χωρὶς αὶματεκχυσίας οὐ γίνσται ἄφεσις, 9:22). See Bahr, Symbol. ii, 201 sq. SEE EXPIATION. The blood of sacrifices was caught by the Jewish priest from the neck of the victim in a basin, then sprinkled seven times (in the case of birds at once shed out) on the altar, i.e. on its horns, its base, or its four corners, or on its side above or below a line running round it, or on the mercy-seat, according to the quality and purpose of the offering; but that of the Passover on the lintel and door-posts (Exodus 12; Lev_4:5-7; Lev_16:14-19; Ugolini, Thes. vol. x and xiii). There was a drain from the Temple into the brook Cedron to carry off the blood (Maimon. apud Cramer de A ra Exter. Ugolini, viii). It sufficed to pour the animal's blood on the earth, or to bury it, as a solemn rendering of the life to God. SEE SACRIFICE.
3. Homicidal. — In this respect " blood" is often used for life: God " will require the blood of man ;" he will punish murder in what manner soever committed (Gen_9:5). " His blood be upon us" (Mat_27:25), let the guilt of his death be imputed to us. "The voice of thy brother's blood crieth;" the murder committed on him crieth for vengeance (Gen_4:10). "The avenger of blood;" he who is to avenge the death of his relative (Num_35:24; Num_35:27). The priests under the Mosaic law were constituted judges between "blood and blood," that is, in criminal matters, and when the life of man was at stake; they had to determine whether the murder were casual or voluntary, whether a crime deserved death or admitted of remission (Deu_17:8). In case of human bloodshed, a mysterious connection is observable between the curse of blood and the earth or land on which it is shed, which becomes polluted by it; and the proper expiation is the blood of the shedder, which every one had thus an interest in exacting, and was bound to seek (Gen_4:10; Gen_9:4-6; Num_35:33; Psa_106:38). SEE AVENGER OF BLOOD. In the case of a dead body found and the death not accounted for, the guilt of blood attached to the nearest city, to be ascertained by measurement, until freed by prescribed rites of expiation (Deu_21:1-9). The guilt of murder is one for which a satisfaction" was forbidden (Num_35:31). SEE MURDER.
4. In a slightly metaphorical sense, " blood" sometimes means race or nature, by virtue of relationship or consanguinity: God "hath made of one blood all nations of men" (Act_17:26). It is also used as the symbol of slaughter and mortality (Isa_34:3; Eze_14:19). It also denotes every kind of premature death (Eze_32:6; Eze_39:18). "The bold imager' of the prophet," says Archbishop Newcome, " is founded on the custom of invitations to feasts after sacrifices; kings, princes, and tyrants being expressed by rams, bulls, and he-goats." Blood is sometimes put for sanguinary purposes, as in Isa_33:15, "He that stoppeth his ears from hearing of blood," or, more properly, who stoppeth his ears to the proposal of bloodshed. To "wash the feet in blood" (Psa_58:10) is to gain a victory with much slaughter. To "build a town with blood" (Hab_2:12) is by causing the death of the oppressed laborers as slaves.
Wine is called the blood of the grape; "He washed his garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes" (Gen_49:11). Here the figure is easily understood, as any thing of a red color may be compared to blood. See Wemyss, Symbol. Dict. s.v. FLESH AND BLOOD are placed in opposition to a superior or spiritual nature: " Flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father who is in heaven" (Mat_16:17). Flesh and blood are also opposed to the glorified body: "Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God" (1Co_15:50). They are opposed to evil spirits: "We wrestle not against flesh and blood," against visible enemies composed of flesh and blood, "but against principalities and powers," etc. (Eph_6:12). SEE EUCHARIST.

CYCLOPEDIA OF BIBLICAL, THEOLOGICAL AND ECCLESIASTICAL
press 1895.

FACEBOOK

Participe de nossa rede facebook.com/osreformadoresdasaude

Novidades, e respostas das perguntas de nossos colaboradores