In Genesis 9, we are going to see what life was like after the flood. We all know that nobody is going to stay in a graveyard if they are sufficiently motivated. Nobody wants to be stuck in a cemetery, but everyone is. Noah and his family, when they left the ark, did not step into paradise regained; they stepped into a whole new world.
Think for a moment about Noah’s situation. I don’t think that when they stepped out of the ark, Noah’s family had the same feelings that Eve did when Adam gave her the first tour of the Garden. There’s no life on this globe except for eight people and a relatively small zoo. What do you think it looked like?
Have you ever witnessed the aftermath of a flood? It doesn’t look like a garden; all around them, there are more reminders of death than of life. The trees they used to take shade in have been wiped away, the hills where they used to climb have been destroyed, and the villages and the houses of the people they used to know have been swept away.
And all around them, as far as they can see, are the carcases and the bones of all of the dead things left by the flood. They’re not back in Eden; they’re after the flood. How would you like to live in the world’s largest cemetery?
They are entering a much different and much harsher creation than they have ever known. That’s one reason why the first thing Noah felt that he needed to do when he stepped out of the ark was to call upon God, Genesis 8:20.
We don’t need to wonder if worship has an effect; look at the next verse in Genesis 8:21, ‘The Lord smelled the pleasing aroma.’ Now, of course, God doesn’t have a nose or a sense of smell, but the text is trying to tell us that God is moved by worship, God is responsive when we offer Him our sacrifices and our praise.
And so, at the altar, God announces an alteration of the way He’s going to deal with man. He says, ‘The way I have dealt with him is not how I’m going to deal with him in the future, even though his nature is unaltered,’ Genesis 8:21.
In other words, the flood did nothing to solve the dilemma of man’s sin; the catastrophe forever changed man’s environment, but it didn’t change his basic nature. And so, the implication here, right in Genesis 8, is that post-flood living isn’t going to be a picnic. What God does in Genesis 9 is an issue with some new rules for this new world; this isn’t going to be Eden.
God blessed Noah and his sons and told them to refill the earth with more people, Genesis 9:1 / Genesis 1:28-29 / Genesis 2:16-17. The Hebrew word used for fill is ‘male’, which means ‘to fill’ or ‘fill up’. Noah has just spent over a year in a very close environment with a small group of animals from God’s creation.
And they have probably gotten fairly comfortable with each other, but God announces that that’s going to change. He then bestowed on Noah supremacy over every living creature, Genesis 9:2, virtually restoring to him the authority that had originally been given to Adam, Genesis 1:28.
The relationship between the animals changed dramatically, hence why God placed fear and dread on the animals, Genesis 9:2. It was for self-preservation purposes; this is animal instinct. It’s here we see the change of relationship with the animals, as they could now hunt, kill, and eat the animals, Genesis 9:2-3.
And it’s here we see the change of relationship regarding their diet, they were given permission to eat meat as well as vegetables, mankind was vegetarian up to this point, Genesis 1:29.
However, they weren’t permitted to eat meat with the lifeblood still in it, Genesis 9:4. Since that’s how it has always been, we forget that’s not how it used to be, Leviticus 3:17 / Leviticus 7:2-27 / Leviticus 19:26 / Deuteronomy 12:1-24 / 1 Samuel 14:32-34. In Genesis 1, God said, ‘that He created the animals for the enjoyment of man,’ Genesis 1:26 / Genesis 2:19-20.
I’m not sure if there was some kind of level of communication with animals back then because Eve wasn’t surprised when the Serpent spoke to her, Genesis 3:1-4, but the animals weren’t for a covering because man was naked and had no shame, Genesis 2:25.
The animals weren’t for food because man was vegetarian back then, Genesis 1:29-30, and evidently in the beginning, there was a wonderful relationship between man and the animals, which God created for His good pleasure, Genesis 1:26 / Genesis 2:19-20.
But God says, ‘It’s not going to be like that anymore, there’s a new factor that now has to enter in.’ He doesn’t include in this list a group of animals that He mentioned in Genesis 1 called ‘cattle and domesticated animals,’ Genesis 1:24.
In other words, there are going to be some animals that will not have a natural dread of man, that man will not be able to work with. But the fact of the matter is that from that day forward to this very day, a typical animal will do all that it can do to avoid the approach of man.
After the flood, God says, ‘animal flesh is going to be a part of man’s diet’ back in Genesis 1. We know that before the flood, man was vegetarian. Now God said, ‘That’s going to change, and now I’m giving you the flesh of animals as part of your food.’ I’m not sure why, but possibly one reason is that the flood so changed the soil of the earth that it wasn’t suitable for growing crops all over like it used to be.
A lot of people today are vegetarians, and that’s not a problem; my problem with vegetarianism is that behind it, there is a lot of pantheistic theology. In other words, we don’t eat animals because animals are equal to humans, and animals have a deity as a part of them. God says clearly here that animals are not created for man; they are created for man, Genesis 1:26 / Genesis 2:19-20, and He says, ‘I have given them to you for food.’ Genesis 9:3.
Just as a side note right here, we learn that the Bible teaches that food is a continuing gift from God, and it is to be received with thanksgiving; that’s something else we mustn’t forget. Notice, He gave Noah flesh to eat, but He didn’t give him blood to drink, Genesis 9:4.
Now that was probably to teach two truths.
1. Although the flesh is given for food, the life of the flesh is to be given for sacrifice, and later in the Bible God teaches the children of Israel that the blood is the symbol of life, and the blood belongs to God, it’s to be offered to God.
2. Life is God’s property, and even the taking of animal life needs to recognise that God is sovereign and has authority over all life; it all comes from Him.
That’s going to have some obvious implications for human life and the taking of human life because God knows in this new world, that men are going to take human life.
Willis, in his commentary, says the following.
‘This law is for mankind, not merely Israel.’
Aalders, in his commentary, says the following.
‘The eating of raw meat tended to foster a condition in men that would lead to their ‘becoming wild.’
Remember the very first death on this planet was a murder, Genesis 4:1-16, and God knew there would be many more. God says, the flood didn’t change man, ‘every inclination of his heart is evil,’ Genesis 6:5 / Genesis 8:21.
The curse on Cain, Genesis 4:11-16, the flood, these things didn’t deter man from his continual thirst for violence. But Scripture tells us that God demands an accounting for every life, Genesis 8:5. By the way, did you notice that human life is so precious to God, He didn’t just demand an accounting if a man takes a man’s life, He demands an accounting if an animal takes a man’s life, Genesis 8:5.
It’s very important for us to understand that God said, ‘even after the fall, even after the flood, even though man has been marred by sin, he still bears my image, ‘he is still in my image,’ Genesis 9:6 / Genesis 1:26-27.
And the reason God is so harsh when it comes to murder is that God says, ‘murder displays a contempt towards Me’ Matthew 5:21-22, because it’s a deliberate denunciation of the inherent dignity that My image grants to a person, Genesis 8:6.
God said to Noah, ‘I want you to be like producers and not like takers.’, and so, God announces a new rule for this new world, Genesis 8:6. So, what is God doing?
Capital punishment was practised here in Britain many years ago, and I know it’s a very controversial issue. I think it’s important to realise that, unlike other ancient cultures, the Bible never imposes the death penalty for crimes against property, only against persons.
But it’s also important to realise that the Bible doesn’t just grant the right, but it also grants the responsibility to put murderers to death. I believe that this short little passage is ordaining human government and the necessity for this government to practice capital punishment in this new world.
Now God isn’t speaking here about family revenge; He’s stressing that all men are responsible to see that life is protected and justice is executed. Some people say, ‘Well, now we need to let God take care of the murderer; God may strike the murderer down.’ Notice that little phrase, ‘by man shall his blood be shed,’ Genesis 9:6; every time it’s used in the Old Testament, it’s used for human action and not divine action.
Let me give you my view of capital punishment: I’m for it, and I’m against it. I’m for it because I believe that God has commanded it here, that human life is so precious that the murderer should be put to death.
And against it in the sense that it is handled by governments that are unjust, and consequently, capital punishment too often is dished out to the person who is poor and can’t afford the best justice, or they are the wrong colour.
If the Government can be just, then I think capital punishment is the right and even the responsibility granted by God. Now I can’t do anything about governments that behave unjustly, and the Bible is full of examples.
If governments are unjust, God is going to judge those governments. But God does say that life in this new world is going to be so violent that I am ordaining government to be the instrument for helping man live with his neighbour.
Nowhere in the Bible does it say that, if someone offends you, you have the right to go out and strike them down, 1 Peter 2:14 / Romans 13:1-4. I believe capital punishment is bad, but I believe Genesis 6 is worse, a life where there is chaos, a life where there is anarchy, and a life where human life is cheapened and devalued, is worse.
It’s significant, by the way, that both Jesus and Paul were on trial. They acknowledged the right of government to execute, but they challenged the legitimacy of the particular charges made against them.
One of the greatest arguments for capital punishment, especially by evangelicals, is ‘because capital punishment is a deterrent against crime.’ I want you to notice there’s nothing in the Bible about that, especially here in Genesis 9. In fact, the text maintains that murder isn’t due to the lack of proper threats and penalties, but it’s due to the persistent wickedness in man’s heart.
The purpose of capital punishment isn’t to deter crime; it’s to teach the sacredness of persons, due to their creation and the sovereignty of the creator. We hear sometimes that God is ‘Pro-life’, I prefer to say that God is ‘Pro-person.’
God is for people, and every single person bears His image, Genesis 1:26-27. And only God gave them that image and only God has the right to take that life away, and God is deeply concerned to let us know that He is ‘Pro-person.’ And He wants us to know that we are His special interest, and He didn’t leave us without revelation in this new world.
Notice how over and over God just repeats Himself, ‘never again, I’m going to establish, I’m going to remember, never again, I’m going to promise.’ The word covenant occurs some two hundred times in the Old Testament.
Notice that this covenant has nothing to do with faith, and this covenant was made by God with not only mankind but all life, including animal life, Genesis 8:8-10. The promise was that God would never again destroy the earth with water, Genesis 8:11 / Isaiah 54:9-10. It’s a covenant for all generations to come, Genesis 8:12.
I don’t think God is repeating Himself for His benefit; I think it’s for Noah’s benefit. Imagine what Noah has been through. Sometimes, by the time we get to read the story about Noah and the flood, we make it sound like it was a nice little sail with a bunch of cute, cuddly little animals.
This has been the worst year of Noah’s life; he’s been through an absolute ordeal. Everywhere he looks when he comes out of the ark, he sees signs of death. What do you think he would do the next time the earth thundered if he didn’t have this promise?
Even though God knows the world is going to get wicked again, God says, ‘Noah, I am never again going to put anybody through what I have just put you through.’ He says to Noah, ‘You can depend on the regular order of nature not being destroyed again on the universal scale,’ Genesis 9:11 / Genesis 8:22.
Notice God didn’t demand any pledge of obedience in response to this covenant; the entire initiative is taken by God. ‘I now establish, I am making, I have set, I will remember, I will see it.’ Notice the terms that God used in speaking about the covenant because they are both important and significant.
1. I establish My covenant with you and with your seed after you, Genesis 9:9.
2. God calls it My covenant, Genesis 9:11.
3. The covenant for all generations to come, Genesis 9:12.
4. A covenant between Me and the earth, Genesis 9:13.
5. I will remember My covenant, Genesis 9:15.
6. The everlasting covenant between God and every living creature, Genesis 9:16.
7. The covenant which I have established between Me and all flesh that is upon the earth, Genesis 9:17.
There’s only one word to adequately describe a covenant like this, and that’s the word grace. Man hasn’t changed; man deserves a flood every year. But God says, ‘no’ and binds Himself to a pledge, and God put the sign for all of life to see, to remember this pledge.
I remember driving up to Scotland with my family one time when the heavens opened, and the rain just poured down. And when it was over, there was this amazing rainbow going from one side of a field to another and in between, there were some cows and sheep in the field, and I thought to myself, God’s art is so much better than man’s.
He makes a covenant between Himself and Noah and every living creature, a covenant for all generations to come, Genesis 9:12. He sets His rainbow in the clouds, as the sign of the covenant between me and the earth, Genesis 9:13-14 / Ezekiel 1:28. And God put the sign for all of life to see, to remember this pledge, Genesis 9:13.
There’s something going on here that we miss in English, but the Hebrews would have noticed. The word here for ‘rainbow’, Genesis 9:13-14 / Genesis 9:16, is the same word for ‘bow’, the bow that the hunter uses, the bow that the warrior uses.
What God is saying is, ‘as a sign of my offer of grace and peace to you, I’m going to hang my bow up. I’m going to hang my bow up as a visible sign that I don’t want judgment, I want relationships.’
Coffman, in his commentary, says the following.
‘New Testament emphasis on the rainbow is pronounced. It adorns the throne of God Himself, Revelation 4:3, and encircles the head of the Rainbow Angel who holds open the redemptive Word of God for mankind, Revelation 10:1.’
We don’t always see the rainbow when the storm comes, but God does. He always sees it, He always remembers, and when we see it, we should always remember that He is patient with this new world.
1. We’ve learned that we should see the necessity of human government.
Because of how life is going to be after the flood, because man is so given to evil, we see that we need government. Government is God’s gracious emergency provision for the protection of life in a fallen world, 1 Peter 2:14 / Romans 13:1-4.
God doesn’t endorse a particular kind of government; Britain happens to prefer democracy. But the form can vary from the need that is established in Genesis 9. And I want to say that Christians can react in two extremes to the Government, and they are both unbiblical.
1. Is to think that we have no obligation to submit to the government.
I heard where people say, ‘because we’re Christians, we are part of a different kingdom, we don’t have to pay taxes, we don’t have to obey, we shouldn’t have to vote, we don’t have no relationship to human government.’
I think it is important that not one single Old Testament or New Testament saint ever actively rebelled against government. In fact, Paul tells us what our relationship should be like in 1 Timothy 2:1-2.
I know sometimes we get frustrated with the government. If someone asks me what I think about capital punishment? ‘I think everybody at the capital ought to be punished.’ But what I need to do regardless of my thoughts is honour my leaders and pray for them, Romans 13:1 / 1 Peter 2:1-2.
Here’s another wrong attitude towards government.
2. Some Christians err on the opposite extreme and expect government to solve man’s most ultimate problems. They can’t do that.
What we see in the text is that man’s ultimate problem is that he’s got a corrupt heart. Government can prescribe, and government can enforce penalties, but government cannot develop morality.
God has established another institution to deal with man’s heart, and it is called, ‘The church.’ And so, we support government, and we pray for government, but we don’t expect government to come up with an answer for man’s greatest need; that’s got to be Jesus.
2. We should see in this text the evidence for divine commitment.
In other words, this world has deserved more floods than could be counted. And it has been spared not because of man but in spite of him. Why hasn’t there been another flood? Why hasn’t there been another universal judgment?
In 2 Peter 3:9, we find Peter’s only explanation for why the world is still turning. Every time you see that bow up in the sky still hanging there, you need to hear the sermon God is gracious. And by the way, you need to hear the same every time you see the cross. Because, like the bow, the cross is a symbol of judgment, but it’s also an offer of peace.
When Louise 12th was made king of France, his enemies put him in prison before he became king. And when he was in there, he made a list of all his enemies, and behind each name, he put a red cross.
But when his enemies found out about that were terrified of him, and they ran in fear, not knowing that when he put that cross beside their names, he did it as a reminder that just as Christ forgave him, he needed to forgive his enemies.
And so, what they interpreted as a sign of judgment was really an offer of peace. The cross is God’s offer of peace when judgment is deserved. And all men need to seek it while they still can.
3. We need to see the foreshadowing of universal judgment.
God said, ‘Never again by water,’ Genesis 9:11. So, all the way back in Genesis 9, the next judgment is foreshadowed. And judgment is going to come because man is not going to change, 2 Peter 3:10-11. Peter likes to call us ‘Aliens and strangers in the world’, 1 Peter 2:11.
And over and over the scriptures tell us that you are living on an orbiting graveyard. Nobody likes to be stuck in a cemetery, but everybody is. But the word of the scripture is, don’t get too comfortable, don’t get too complacent, don’t get too at home in this place, 2 Peter 2:11-14.
And just let me stop there and ask you, are you? Are you looking forward to that absolute dilation of the Earth? Are you looking forward to the day when God sets this cemetery on fire? Well, I can tell if you are. Because if you are, you will ‘make every effort to be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him.’
You can be at peace with God. The bow is still on the wall of the heavens. There’s still time to make peace with God. The message of the Bible is that you’re living on an orbiting graveyard. God has hung up the bow for now, and he has offered us peace. But you’ve got to wash the death off and keep it off.
That’s why we confess our sins, 1 John 1:9; we don’t want the death to cling to us. We got washed in Christ, we got baptised in Christ, Matthew 28:19-20 / Acts 3:38, and we put on new clothes, Romans 6:3-4. We don’t want to put those old clothes back on.
We confess our sins so that the blood can just keep washing the death off, 1 John 1:9. We want to be holy and spotless on the day when this world burns up, Ephesians 5:27 / Colossians 1:22.
After having a discussion during a Bible study concerning ‘eating blood’, the discussion went on to speak about the eating of ‘steak cooked rare’ and ‘Black Pudding’, a British dish, which for some became the subject of amusement, and some thought it was hardly worth speaking about.
That attitude, I believe, was a big mistake, because in the Scriptures, where blood is mentioned over three hundred times, it’s never treated lightly or frivolously, and I think this will become evident as we look at some of the passages of Scripture in which blood is mentioned.
Let’s first make clear what it is that we’re about to consider, because whilst most of us have heard about ‘Black Puddings’, very few of us will have given them a great deal of thought, and this, I suggest, it’s even true among the people who eat them! Of course, blood itself is something we all take very seriously, after all, it has been described as ‘The Red River of Life’, and this is certainly an apt description because we cannot live without it.
Our lungs supply oxygen to the blood, and our heart pumps the oxygenated blood throughout our body by means of the arteries, so that, among its many functions, blood supplies vital oxygen and nutrients, it keeps us either hot or cool as may be necessary, it fights infections, and it eliminates waste products. Indeed, the importance of the role played by our blood may be judged by the number of times we are required by our doctors to undergo blood tests.
And the reason why blood is so important is revealed in Leviticus 17:14: ‘The life of every creature is its blood.’ No! We take ‘blood’ seriously. It’s the addition of the word ‘pudding’ that changes our perception and introduces a note of levity into the discussion.
One can scarcely say, ‘pudding’ without raising a smile, but in answering the question posed at the beginning of this study, I think that we shall find that this black object, created by some resourceful butcher as he sought to make use of every part of the carcass on which he had been working, and then presented as an article of food, should not be treated lightly.
What are the ingredients of black pudding? These days, in the different parts of our own country, and in other countries where it’s produced, the manufacturers change the constituents of the ‘pudding’, in order create their own special, or unique, recipe, but a Black Pudding originally and essentially consists of pig’s blood, which is heated and allowed to cool until it congeals and then is stuffed into a piece of pig’s intestine.
Traditionally, it’s formed into fairly round balls, but these days, it’s also sold in slices, as the makers attempt to attract a modern clientele. As to its food value, think about these facts: 3½ ounces of Black Pudding contains about 90 calories and provides 1 gram of carbohydrates, 1 gram of sugar, 15 grams of protein, 680 milligrams of salt, 6.4 milligrams of iron, and 35 grams of fat.
This means that eleven pounds of Black Pudding contains about two hundred and twenty grams of fat. This hardly qualifies to be labelled a healthy foodstuff! But, even if Black Pudding is a perfect food, providing everything that our body needs, the question would still remain: is it something that a Christian should eat?
There is no obvious mention of blood in the first three chapters of Genesis, although it’s apparent that, in providing a covering for Adam and Eve, the blood of animals was shed and sacrificed! Genesis 3:21. And it was God Himself who provided the sacrifice. There is no mention of animals being slaughtered for food because our first parents ate fruit and vegetables, Genesis 2:9 / Genesis 2:16.
They were not meat-eaters until after the flood, as we know. The first use of the word ’blood’, a word which occurs more than three hundred times in the Bible, is found in Genesis 4:10, when God said to Cain, ‘The voice of your brother’s blood cries to me from the ground’.
God knew when blood had been shed, and the consequence of that first murder was that the ground would ‘it will no longer yield its crops for you’, Genesis 4:12. In other words, the earth would no longer be as productive or as fruitful as before. This is the first indication of the importance that God attached to blood.
When we come to the covenant with Noah, in Genesis 9, it was after the flood had subsided and Noah and his family had emerged from the Ark that God spoke about the Covenant, which was to be made, not merely with Noah but with ‘every living creature of all flesh’, Genesis 9:15.
A covenant invariably consists of conditions and blessings. In Genesis 9:1, we read that God blessed Noah and his sons and commissioned them to repopulate the earth. He then bestowed on Noah supremacy over every living creature, Genesis 9:2. It was at this point that God made an addition to man’s diet, Genesis 9:3.
Man became a ‘carnivore’, a meat-eater, but there then follows a condition, a prohibition, Genesis 9:4. It’s impossible not to see that this verse alone is sufficient to prohibit the eating of blood in any form whatsoever.
From the earliest of times, the Bible reveals, God has emphasised the sacredness of blood, whether animal or human and has hedged it around with very strict prohibitions. Notice, also, that embedded in this covenant is God’s law relating to wilful murder, Genesis 9:6.
The sacredness of blood was later revealed in the sacrificial system, concerning which God gave instructions to Moses. I think that we who were never under the Mosaic Law and who, consequently, weren’t required to implement its commands relating to animal sacrifice, are inclined to treat what we read about it in a casual sort of way.
For example, this is how we often see it: a Hebrew, sins and brings an animal sacrifice as a sin offering, intended to appease an aggrieved God. Having offered his sacrifice, everything is put right again! Or so we think! But it wasn’t so simple or straightforward!
The ritual of animal sacrifice was never just a convenient and simple ceremony, because, in the first place, the animal which the sinner brought for sacrifice must be an animal which he himself had nurtured and for which he had cared.
In order to comply with the Mosaic Law, he must present the animal at the temple, where the priest would examine it to ensure that there was no flaw or deformity in it, since anything of that nature would render it unfit for sacrifice.
However, in later times, it wasn’t uncommon for the priest to reject the animal on the pretext of having found some ‘imperfection’ in it, which meant that the unfortunate worshipper was compelled to buy an approved animal from the priest. There was, of course, no provision made in the Mosaic Law for the purchase of animals for sacrifice.
This form of ‘made easy and convenient’ was the invention of the priests, who, as we see when Jesus encountered them in the temple court, had created a profitable business out of the sale of animals for sacrifice, and, for their part, the people themselves had come to accept this convenient arrangement which said, in effect, ‘no need to take the trouble of bringing animals for sacrifice up to the temple. It can all be arranged at a price!’
It is not surprising, therefore, that Jesus was made angry by this commercialisation of religion and the blatant degrading of the God-given system of sacrifice. Why do you think Jesus cleansed out the temple twice? John 2:13-17 / Matthew 21:12-17.
Again, we often suppose that, on his arrival at the temple, the worshipper simply handed over his animal to the priest, who took it away, slaughtered it, and then applied the blood ‘according to the Law’.
But this also is a mistake, because ‘according to the Law’ the guilty sinner must himself apply the knife to the throat of the sacrificial victim, his own lamb! which he had brought up! reared! And which the family may even have adored as a pet! 2 Samuel 12:2-3.
In imposing these procedures, was God being severe? hard? insensitive? Perhaps this is how it appears to us today, but it was in this way that God compelled the sinner to recognise the grave and painful cost of sin!
In modern times, Judaism continues to strictly observe God’s prohibition on the eating of any form of blood. Animals intended for food are slaughtered in a manner which allows the blood to drain away, as God commanded.
Originally, this ritual slaughter would have been supervised by the Priests, but, because the Jews have now no priesthood the function has been taken over by the Rabbi, who monitors the procedure to ensure that it is ‘kosher’, a word which means, ‘correct, genuine or legitimate’ and, therefore, producing flesh fit for food, because it has been prepared according to the laws found in Leviticus 11, the which identify the clean and the unclean animals, that is, those fit for food and those that are unfit.
Along with this chapter, we should read Leviticus 17, and Deuteronomy 12, also passages where God specifically prohibits the use of blood as food, Leviticus 17:10. Leviticus 17:11-14, explains 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.’
The Hebrews generally obeyed these laws, and exceptions were rare. The prime example of a case of disobedience is found in 1 Samuel 14, where, having defeated the Philistines in battle, King Saul’s soldiers killed the animals they had captured from the enemy and, after slaughtering them, ate the flesh without allowing the blood to drain from the carcass. When Saul heard this, he told his men, ‘Look, the men are sinning against the LORD by eating meat that has blood in it’, 1 Samuel 14:33.
When we move to the New Testament, after the first Gentiles obeyed the Gospel and had been admitted to the fellowship of the church, an important meeting was held in Jerusalem, when the apostles and elders met together to discuss the extent to which the Gentiles might be required to comply with the Mosaic Law.
The issue was raised by Jewish Christians who, still ‘zealous’ for the law, mistakenly believed that Gentiles must first submit to the Law of Moses before they could become Christians, and the rite of circumcision was expressly mentioned.
The conclusion reached by this meeting was that the Gentiles should not be troubled by such pressure, but, out of regard for the sensitivities of their Jewish brethren, they should be advised to ‘abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from BLOOD,’ Acts 15:20.
And this was the instruction which went out to all the congregations where non-Jews had fellowship, Galatians 4:4-5. Until ‘the set time had fully come, God sent his Son, to redeem’, redemption, the forgiveness of sins, wasn’t possible. The Hebrew writer tells us this, Hebrews 10:4.
In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word for Atonement is ‘kippurim’, which simply means ‘a covering up’. In other words, sins weren’t blotted out, cancelled, or washed away, because the blood of an animal couldn’t suffice to deal with the sins of a man. The lesser couldn’t die in the place of the greater.
Even that solemn ceremony on the Day of Atonement, the most solemn and important day in their year, didn’t offer the Jews forgiveness. God accepted the sacrifice as a confession or acknowledgement of the nation’s sins, and ‘covered them’ for another year, always looking forward to the time when the sacrifice would be made, which would effectively atone for sin.
This is why the Scriptures tell us that ‘those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins,’ Hebrews 10:4. The burden of the nation’s guilt was rolled forward, carried over for another year, but think of the ‘rivers of blood’ which flowed during Old Testament times! Sacrifices were offered every day in the temple, morning and evening. Personal sacrifices, national sacrifices, sin offerings, thank offerings.
Yet none of these provided the assurance of forgiveness. They all pointed forward to the time when God Himself would provide the sacrifice that saves us from sin. Only in the New Testament do we read of redemption, remission, and forgiveness, because the shedding of the blood of Christ did something that animal sacrifices could never do, John 1:29 / Hebrews 9:26.
Does this prohibition on the eating of blood apply today? We must recognise that some of God’s Laws were dispensational and therefore temporary in their application. There were ceremonial laws related to worship at specific periods in Old Testament history.
The particular sacrifices about which we have spoken are examples of a ritual which belonged to the Old Mosaic Law, which Paul says, ‘Jesus took out of the way, nailing it to His cross’, Colossians 2:14. That is, He treated it in the manner in which a cancelled debt was treated in ancient times. The cancelled bill was nailed to a place where all could see that the debt had been paid.
Others were moral laws, which are permanent and which never change, but remain valid for all ages. Murder, for instance, has always been condemned by God. Jesus tells us that His law relating to the sanctity of all kinds of blood belongs to this category of law.
1. It’s important to recognise that the law prohibiting the use of blood for food doesn’t come from the Mosaic Law. It preceded the law and existed in the Patriarchal Age, as Genesis 9 clearly proves.
2. This law wasn’t given to Hebrews, Israelites, or Jews alone, because the passage makes clear that the Covenant that God made was made with all mankind, as a ‘generation to generation covenant’, the sign of which remains with us even today, the rainbow!
3. All that we read in the Scriptures relating to blood must be considered in relation to God’s plan for the redemption of mankind by means of the shedding of the blood of His own Lamb.
For this reason, God declared ALL blood to be sacred! This includes the blood of the animal, which oozes out of those steaks cooked rare; this includes the blood in which Black Pudding is produced and eaten. Even animal blood mustn’t be shed wantonly, and the wanton shedding of human blood should be dealt with severely, even animal, human or divine.
We describe the blood of Christ as ‘divine’ because Paul does, Acts 20:28. The abstaining from blood wasn’t a part of the Mosaic Law; it was a part of the covenant made with Noah and the whole earth and applies to every one of every generation. This law wasn’t nailed to the cross. Is it acceptable to God to eat rare, cooked steak? Is it acceptable to God to eat Black Pudding? Based on the above texts, the answer is surely obvious!
Here, read that from Noah and his family, the population of earth began to grow again, Genesis 9:18-19 / Genesis 10-11. From the text here, we see that Noah was a farmer, Genesis 9:20, like Cain, Genesis 4:1-2, and it’s in this text we find the first mention of ‘wine’, and sadly it’s used in the negative sense as Noah gets drunk, Genesis 9:21 / Proverbs 20:1 / Proverbs 23:29-33 / Ephesians 5:18.
The chances are that this new fruit of the vine was probably unknown to Noah and his family, and because he drank too much, possibly unaware of its strength, his actions led to some pretty bad consequences. In his drunken state, he lay naked, exposing himself, Genesis 9:21, which later God would say is sinful, Leviticus 18:5-19 / Leviticus 20:17-21.
Dods, in his commentary, says the following.
‘Noah is not the only man who has walked uprightly and kept his garment unspotted from the world so long as the eye of man was upon him, but who has lain uncovered on his own tent floor.’
Ham, the father of Canaan, Genesis 9:1, seems to make a joke about his father’s nakedness and proceeded to tell his brothers, Genesis 9:22. Some Jews believe that Ham actually raped his father, Leviticus 20:17, but there’s nothing in the text to suggest this.
Notice that Shem and Japheth didn’t even want to have accidentally seen their father naked, but out of respect, walked in backwards, Genesis 9:23. Shem and Japheth were wise enough not to have a look at their father’s nakedness for themselves and were very careful to cover their father up, Genesis 9:23.
When Noah sobered up or woke up, he realised what had happened, Genesis 9:24, and as a result Ham, the father of Canaan, was left without a blessing, but Canaan was specifically cursed to be the servant of his brethren, Genesis 9:25.
Why did Noah curse Canaan and not Ham? The simple answer is, the text doesn’t tell us. It’s certainly possible he didn’t curse Ham because earlier God had blessed Ham, Genesis 9:1 / Romans 11:29.
It’s also possible that Canaan was somehow involved; maybe he, too, saw Noah’s nakedness. It’s also possible that Canaan possessed some of the materialistic nature of his father and realised that things would just get worse in the future, Leviticus 18:3-29 / Deuteronomy 20:17-18.
The result of Ham’s sin was the Canaanites are going to reap the consequences of Ham’s sin, Genesis 9:25. The character of Canaan is shown in the nature of his descendants, remember they became an immoral people who eventually became a curse to the Israelites, it was the Canaanites and their gods that became the sign of moral filth and rebellion against God, Leviticus 18:24-25 / Deuteronomy 20:17-18.
Sailhamer, in his commentary, says the following.
‘The sons of Noah are here shown to belong to two groups of humankind, those who, like Adam and Eve, hide the shame of their nakedness and those who, like Ham, or rather the Canaanites, have no sense of their shame before God. The one group, the line of Shem, will be blessed, Genesis 9:26; but the other, the Canaanites (not the Hamites), can only be cursed, Genesis 9:25.’
God blessed Shem and his descendants, Genesis 9:26, who established a moral lineage throughout history; they were to have mastery over Ham, Genesis 9:26.
Coffman, in his commentary, says the following.
‘This means that in a particular sense, God would be identified as ‘the God of Shem,’ through whom the Messiah would come for human redemption. This is the prophetic designation of Shem as the patriarch through whom Jesus would be born.’
The blessing of Japheth, Genesis 9:27, resulted in them having the largest share of the world, the Europeans. This was fulfilled when Rome ruled the world. Noah was blessed to reach the ripe old age of nine hundred and fifty, Genesis 9:28 / Hebrews 11:7 / 2 Peter 2:5. Since Abraham was born about two hundred and ninety-two years after the Flood, it appears that, for fifty-eight years, Noah was a contemporary of Abraham!