Genesis 9:4
A careful reading of Genesis 9:4 shows that the Hebrew
does not prohibit eating blood, as the Watchtower teaches, but meat which has
blood in it. Almost all translations of Genesis 9:4 (including the Watchtower’s
New World Translation) read in words
similar to the King James Version: “But flesh with the life thereof [still in
it], which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.” Or, as the Anchor Bible states: “Only flesh with
its life blood still in it shall you not eat.” A footnote literally translates
the passages as “whose blood in the/its being” (p. 58). Considered by some the
most accurate translation of the Bible today, The New International Version, states, “But you must not eat meat
that has its lifeblood still in it.”
In other words, the eating of blood was no more expressly
prohibited than the eating of meat. Rather, the eating of a certain kind of
meat and the eating of a certain kind of blood were both prohibited. It was
only meat in combination with blood or meat with blood in it that was
prohibited. If one concludes from Genesis 9:4 that it is wrong to eat blood,
then one must also conclude that it is wrong to eat meat. This would contradict
Genesis 9:3, which gives man permission to eat meat. Since in the Hebrew the
word blood modifies the word meat, we cannot construe the passage to mean that
the eating of blood itself is forbidden.
The Hebrew word basar
means “flesh” or “body” and, by extension, a person. Thus Genesis 9:4 does not
even say that meat with blood in it is forbidden, but flesh or “bodies” with
blood still in it is prohibited. If the writer had wanted to refer to meat
itself he would have used the Hebrew word mazown,
meaning food or meat in general. In this passage, the words “blood” and “soul”
are synonymous. The teaching is that animal bodies can be eaten, but only
animal bodies without their soul or life still in them.
Bruce Waltke (1976) stated to the author:
I hope my treatment of Genesis 9:4 will help. Actually
the grammatical construction is quite straightforward. The Hebrew text says
literally: “Only flesh with its life, its blood, you must not eat.”
As you suggest flesh is restricted to that kind of flesh
with its life (nephesh) in it.
Grammatically speaking the kind of flesh in view is modified by the adjectival
phrase “with its life.”
The life now is qualified by “its blood”; that is, the
blood and life are equated. In this case the qualification or modification is
indicated by an apposition—that is, blood (dam)
in apposition to life (nephesh).
The Hebrew of Genesis 9:4 tells us that God has now given
man permission to eat animal flesh, but that most of the animal’s blood must be
drained out in order to insure that the animal is dead before it is eaten.
Genesis 9:5 reiterates the fact that man must not eat live animals because of
respect for life. But if the animal was dead, the sanctity of life would not be
profaned because the animal would not have life in it. For thousands of years,
people ate animals while the animals were still alive—a cruelty this passage is
designed to prevent. Pagan cultures taught that the “fight” of the animal eaten
alive could he transferred to the person eating the animal. Other qualities of
the animal, such as strength, power, and wisdom, it was thought could also be
transferred at the same time.
. . .
The Purpose of Genesis 9:4
Because of the grammatical construction of the Hebrew,
nothing else could be meant by Genesis 9:4 other than, as the NWT states: “Only
flesh with its soul—its blood—you must not eat.”
We have shown that Genesis 9:4 most likely teaches that
man should not eat blood while it is still in the flesh, so to speak, because
God wants to be sure that the animal is mercifully dead before it is eaten.
What is God’s purpose in making this restriction? Obviously not to protect
man’s health, because there is nothing inherently unhealthy about eating an
animal’s flesh while that animal is still alive. The Watchtower’s explanation,
that it was protecting against future dangerous transfusions, is not valid
because, although there have been abuses which have resulted in undesirable
side-effects, on the whole medical science is able to improve man’s health to a
great extent through the judicious use of blood transfusions. Again, the reason
for God’s law could only be to assure reverence and respect for all life,
animal or human, since it all comes from God and is sustained by God.
A literal interpretation of Genesis 9:4 is precluded
because of the obvious symbolism and figurative language of the context
surrounding the verse. For example, Genesis 9:4 states, “Your blood of your
souls I shall ask back.” Is God literally asking us to wrap up our blood and
send it back? Obviously not. The text is stating that under certain conditions,
God may take our lives—the word blood in this context is synonymous with
“life.”
If we understand the word blood to be synonymous with
life in Genesis 9:4, we could translate the passage: “Only flesh with its life
still in it you must not eat.” Genesis 9:6 has the same definition of blood:
“Anyone shedding man’s blood, by man will his blood be shed.” This obviously
does not mean that if a man causes another man to bleed, he also must bleed! It
clearly means that if one man takes the life of another, the punishment God
exacts is that the murderer’s life also must be forfeited—“one who takes
another man’s life must lose his own life.” The shedding of blood obviously
refers to the taking of life, just as the word “blood” in verse 4 refers to the
life of the animal. (Jerry Bergman, “Jehovah’s Witnesses and Blood
Transfusions,” The Journal of Pastoral
Practice 4, no. 2 [1980]: 68-70)
To Support this Blog:
Email for Amazon Gift
card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com
Email for Logos.com Gift
Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com
