Things Strangled and the Sanctity of Blood: A Forgotten Commandment in the Apostolic Decree

Introduction: A Neglected Apostolic Instruction

In Acts 15, the Jerusalem council issued four foundational instructions to Gentile believers turning to Aluhym:

“Therefore I judge that we should not trouble those from among the gentiles who are turning to Aluhym, but that we write to them to abstain from the defilements of idols, and from whoring, and from what is strangled, and from blood.” — Acts 15:20-21

While idolatry and immorality are still recognised as sins, few believers today give thought to the latter two instructions. Yet both concern the sacredness of life itself, represented in the blood, and find their very foundation in the instruction given to Noah when he came off the ark and was commissioned to repopulate the earth. There, יהוה established this boundary for all humanity: that life belongs to Him, and its blood must not be consumed.

This article examines why the apostles included this command, how it is rooted in the earliest divine instruction to mankind, and why modern believers cannot afford to dismiss what יהוה Himself has declared sacred.

The Eternal Principle: The Life Is in the Blood

From the earliest moment in which יהוה granted permission for mankind to eat flesh, He also established a sacred boundary concerning the life within that flesh. When Noah came off the ark and was commissioned to repopulate the earth, the Creator made it unmistakably clear that while meat was permitted for sustenance, the life contained within it was not to be consumed.

“Every moving creature that lives is food for you. I have given you all, as I gave the green plants. But do not eat flesh with its life, its blood.” — Genesis 9:4

Here, יהוה appears to establish a foundational principle for humanity: that blood is not merely biological matter, but the divinely appointed sign of life itself. Since Scripture later declares that “the life of the flesh is in the blood” (Leviticus 17:11), it is likely that the prohibition against consuming blood arises from this intimate connection between blood and life. The blood, bearing the life within it, was therefore treated as something set apart, suggesting that the life it carries was not intended for common consumption but was to be handled with reverence and restraint — as life which, in a sacred sense, belongs to יהוה as its Giver and Sustainer.

Centuries later, when יהוה entered into covenant with Israel and gave them His Torah, this same principle was not set aside, but reaffirmed and more clearly defined:

“Only, the blood you do not eat, pour it on the earth like water.” — Deuteronomy 12:16

“Only you shall not eat its blood; you shall pour it on the ground like water.” — Deuteronomy 15:23

What had first been established as a foundational command at the dawn of post-flood humanity was now embedded within the covenant life of Israel, reinforcing the same truth, likely because the life, represented in the blood, is to be regarded as belonging, in a sacred sense, to יהוה and therefore to be returned to Him through the pouring out of the blood upon the earth. This was not a temporary dietary regulation, but a sacred and enduring principle, woven into both the earliest instruction given to mankind and the covenant given to Israel; thus, its observance gave reverence to life itself and, by default, to the Giver of life, acknowledging that what He has sanctified cannot be treated as common.

The apostles appear to have been firmly aware of this sacred pattern and its deep-rooted significance. Guided by the Ruach haQodesh (Holy Spirit), they did not treat the matter of blood and strangled meat as incidental, but included it deliberately within their instruction to the newly converted Gentiles. Their decision reflects more than practical sensitivity; it reveals a deep consciousness of the continuity between the earliest divine instruction and the life of those now turning to יהוה through Messiah.

In issuing this decree, the apostles were not merely regulating table fellowship, nor offering temporary concessions to Jewish custom. They were affirming a moral boundary that reached back to Noah himself and forward into a renewed covenant community formed by the Spirit. The call for Gentiles to abstain from blood and from what was strangled signified an invitation to honour the sanctity of life as defined by יהוה — not as cultural imitation, but as spiritual alignment with His order.

Thus, the inclusion of these commands stands as a conscious act of theological continuity. The apostles, speaking under the guidance of the Spirit, upheld what they understood to be a sacred framework: that reverence for life, expressed through respect for the blood, remains an essential marker of submission to the authority of the Creator. The instruction given to the Gentiles was therefore not peripheral, but integral — drawing them into a pattern of obedience that transcends time, culture, and ethnic boundary.

The Meaning of “Strangled” in Acts 15

“...that they abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled, and from blood.” — Acts 15:20

The Greek word translated as “strangled” is πνικτός (pniktos — G4156), derived from pnigō, meaning to choke, suffocate, or restrict the flow of breath. Yet within its biblical and cultural context, pniktos does not merely describe the method of death, but the condition of the flesh — specifically that of an animal whose life has been taken without the proper shedding or releasing of its blood.

Lexicons define it as:

“An animal deprived of life without shedding its blood.”

Thus, “strangled” may be understood as referring not simply to death by suffocation, but more broadly to any form of killing in which the blood — the life — has not been poured out “like water,” as commanded in the Torah. The defining issue, therefore, appears not to be merely the absence of air, but the absence of bloodletting: the life has been taken, yet the life-fluid remains confined within the flesh.

The essence of strangulation, therefore, lies in the very manner of death, in that it hinders or obstructs the proper release of what has been declared sacred — the life-blood itself.

The Acts 15 Decree as a Covenant Marker

A key, often-overlooked dimension of the Acts 15 decree is its covenantal significance. The four prohibitions given to the Gentiles were not arbitrary nor merely pragmatic measures for congregational harmony. They mirror the very provisions found in Leviticus 17–18 that governed the conduct of the “foreigner who sojourns among you” — Gentiles who lived among Israel and aligned themselves with the worship of יהוה.

It should also be noted that many Gentiles coming to faith were emerging from pagan temple environments in which blood and sacrificial flesh held ritual significance. While such practices varied across regions and cults, participation in meals connected to idol worship — often involving meat in which the blood had not been properly released — formed a common feature of pagan feasting and devotion. The Apostolic prohibition therefore served not only to align Gentile believers with the covenantal pattern of יהוה, but also to draw a clear separation from former religious systems that treated blood as a source of spiritual power or vitality, rather than as something sacred and reserved.

Within Leviticus 17–18, the same areas of concern resurface with striking consistency:

• idolatry

• sexual immorality

• the consumption of blood

• the eating of animals whose blood has not been properly released

These were not peripheral customs, but foundational expectations for those who sought to dwell among the covenant people and honour the God of Israel. They functioned as entry-level markers of allegiance — visible signs that the sojourner recognised the holiness of יהוה and His order for life.

In issuing this decree, the apostles were therefore not imposing a novel burden, but reaffirming an ancient standard. They were calling Gentile believers into continuity with the sacred pattern already established for those who attached themselves to the covenant community, while simultaneously separating them from the defiling practices of pagan worship. Abstaining from blood and from what is strangled thus served — and continues to serve — as a covenant marker, signifying reverence for the sanctity of life and submission to the divine instruction that has governed יהוה’s people from the beginning.

Other Scriptural References Pertaining to the Consumption of Blood

Scripture repeatedly stresses that the consumption of blood is not a minor or indifferent matter, but a serious transgression that touches the very sanctity of life and the order established by יהוה. It is treated not merely as a dietary concern, but as a violation that places the individual in direct opposition to His declared boundary.

“If any man of the house of Israel, or of the strangers who sojourn among them, eats any blood, I will set My face against that person who eats blood, and shall cut him off from among his people.” — Leviticus 17:10

Here, the severity of the warning is unmistakable. יהוה does not merely forbid the act; He declares that He will actively set His face against the one who commits it. This phrase signifies divine opposition and judgment, underscoring that consuming blood represents a breach of the sacred boundary He has established. Notably, this prohibition is extended not only to the native-born Israelite, but also to the sojourner dwelling among them, reinforcing that this command transcends ethnic identity and applies to all who live within the sphere of His authority.

The reason for such gravity is then made clear in the following verse:

“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 makes atonement for the soul.” — Leviticus 17:11

The blood has been divinely appointed for a specific and significant purpose. It is set apart as the means through which atonement is made — a life given in place of another. To consume it, therefore, is to misuse what has been reserved by יהוה for a distinct function, treating as common what He has designated for reconciliation and covering, and in doing so to act contrary to the order He has established.

Centuries later, the prophet Ezekiel echoes this same concern, placing the consumption of blood within a wider pattern of rebellion, moral corruption, and idolatry:

“Therefore say to them, ‘Thus said the Master יהוה, “You eat meat with blood, and you lift up your eyes toward your idols, and shed blood. Should you then possess the land? You depend on your sword, and you commit abominations, and each of you defiles his neighbour’s wife. Should you then possess the land?” ’ ” — Ezekiel 33:25–26

Here, eating meat with its blood is not isolated as a minor infraction, but is grouped alongside idolatry, violence, and sexual immorality — practices that defile both the people and the land itself. Ezekiel presents this behaviour as evidence of a people who have rejected יהוה’s authority while continuing to presume upon His promises. The right to dwell in the land, which was tied to covenant faithfulness, is shown to be incompatible with such persistent disregard for His commands.

The passage continues with a sobering declaration of judgment:

“Thus said the Master יהוה, ‘As I live, those who are in the ruins shall fall by the sword, and the one who is in the open field I shall give to the beasts to be devoured, and those who are in the strongholds and caves shall die of pestilence. And I shall make the land a desert and a waste… because of all their abominations which they have done.’” — Ezekiel 33:27–29

The consequence of despising these commands is not merely personal guilt, but communal devastation and the withdrawal of divine protection. The land itself bears the weight of their disobedience, becoming desolate as a testimony to their unfaithfulness.

Taken together, these passages reveal that the prohibition against consuming blood is rooted in profound theological realities. It concerns the sanctity of life, the divinely appointed function of blood within the sacrificial system, and the recognition that life itself stands under the authority of יהוה. To violate this boundary is not simply to disregard a rule, but to profane what He has designated for a distinct purpose within His order.

The consistent Scriptural witness, therefore, portrays the consumption of blood as an act that crosses a sacred boundary and disrupts the order established by יהוה — one with consequences not only for the individual, but for the wider community as well.

Why This Command Remains Binding Without a Temple

Some argue that prohibitions relating to blood were tied exclusively to the sacrificial system and therefore ended with the destruction of the Temple. Yet the Scriptural witness does not support this conclusion. The command to abstain from blood is neither introduced nor sustained solely within the framework of Temple worship, but precedes it and extends beyond it.

The prohibition was first given to Noah after the flood in direct connection with יהוה’s permission for mankind to eat meat as food (Genesis 9:4). It was issued at the very moment when the consumption of animal flesh was formally permitted, thereby establishing an immediate boundary regarding how that life was to be treated. This places the command within the realm of universal instruction governing human sustenance, rather than within the category of temporary ceremonial regulation. It establishes the boundary as one intended for humanity as a whole, not merely for those living under the later cultic system.

When the instruction is reiterated within the Torah, it is not presented merely as a procedural element of sacrifice, but as a fundamental prohibition accompanied by solemn warning (Leviticus 17:10). While the broader framework of Leviticus 17 is indeed sacrificial — addressing the proper handling of blood in relation to offerings and the centralisation of worship — the passage is not confined solely to sacrificial ritual. Leviticus 17:13, which speaks of hunted animals and the pouring out of their blood, already suggests an application that extends beyond the altar itself. Though blood is given a distinct role within the sacrificial system, Scripture does not present this function as the sole basis for the command, nor does it imply that the prohibition was dependent upon the Temple’s existence or destined to expire with its destruction.

Even aside from this, the instruction given to Noah stands independently of any Temple, priesthood, or sacrificial framework. And even if one were to argue that certain passages in the Torah address the consumption of blood primarily within a sacrificial context, it cannot reasonably be imagined that יהוה would forbid the eating of blood in relation to sacred offerings while simultaneously permitting its consumption outside that context. Such a conclusion would contradict the coherence of His instruction and reduce a moral boundary to a situational technicality. The prohibition, therefore, cannot be confined to sacrificial ritual alone but must be understood as a consistent and enduring command governing the treatment of life itself.

Moreover, the work of יהושוע (Messiah) does not nullify this command but places it within a fuller redemptive context. His blood, poured out for the forgiveness of sins, does not render blood ordinary or common, but rather fulfils the pattern in which blood is treated with the utmost seriousness. The shedding of His own blood stands in continuity with the principle established since Genesis — that life and blood are not to be consumed, but offered and poured out.

Some may object by pointing to יהושוע’s words that His followers would “drink His blood.” Yet this language was never intended to be understood in a physical or literal sense, but symbolically, speaking of participation in His life and covenant through faith. Even if one were to insist otherwise and argue that Messiah’s words now permit the consumption of blood, such reasoning would remain flawed, for permission — even hypothetically — to partake in His blood would not thereby authorise the consumption of animal blood. The uniqueness of His sacrifice cannot be transferred to ordinary flesh, nor can His redemptive act be used to dissolve a boundary that Scripture consistently upholds.

The destruction of the Temple, therefore, does not dissolve the divine boundary surrounding blood. No Scriptural text indicates that this command was conditional upon the Temple’s existence or limited to the period of animal sacrifice. On the contrary, the apostles reaffirmed the prohibition after the resurrection and ascension of Messiah, demonstrating their understanding that it remained binding, moral, and universal.

Thus, abstaining from blood cannot rightly be viewed as a discontinued ritual tied to a vanished sanctuary, but as a command that endures across covenants — upheld before the Temple, during its operation, and to be maintained after its fall.

Modern Slaughter and the Loss of Bloodletting

Having established that the command to abstain from blood remains binding and that believers are therefore called to exercise discernment concerning the manner in which animal life is taken, it follows that attention must be given to how animals are slaughtered in practice. Since “strangled” refers to the taking of life without the proper release of blood, it becomes necessary to examine whether contemporary methods of slaughter align with or depart from this Scriptural requirement. With this in view, let us consider the typical techniques through which animals are killed in modern industry.

Common Modern Slaughter Methods

In contemporary industrial systems, animals are typically rendered unconscious or killed through one of the following methods before further processing. These techniques prioritise speed, efficiency, and regulatory compliance, though they vary significantly in how they affect the release of blood.

• CO₂ Gassing (Gas Stunning): Primarily used for pigs and sometimes poultry. Animals are placed in chambers filled with high concentrations of carbon dioxide, leading to loss of consciousness and death through oxygen deprivation. In many cases, death occurs before any incision is made, meaning the blood may not be properly released.

• Electrical Stunning: Used for cattle, sheep, pigs, and poultry. An electrical current passes through the animal’s body or head to induce unconsciousness. Depending on voltage and duration, this can lead to paralysis or cardiac arrest prior to throat cutting, thereby reducing or preventing effective blood flow.

• Captive Bolt Stunning: Common in cattle and large livestock. A metal bolt is driven into the skull, causing immediate brain trauma and death. As this method often halts the heart instantly, normal blood circulation ceases before any significant bloodletting can occur.

• Mechanical Cervical Dislocation: Used mainly for poultry. The neck is manually or mechanically snapped, leading to rapid death without any intentional blood release.

• Percussive Stunning: A forceful blow to the head causes unconsciousness or death. This method disrupts brain function and frequently prevents meaningful blood drainage.

• High-Frequency Electrocution: Used particularly in poultry processing lines where birds are stunned en masse. As with other electrical methods, this often compromises the heart before blood can be properly drawn out.

• Low Atmospheric Pressure Stunning (LAPS): Used primarily for poultry. Birds are placed in a sealed chamber where air pressure is gradually reduced, inducing hypoxia and death. This process results in the loss of life without intentional bloodletting, as death typically occurs prior to any incision.

• Nitrogen / Inert Gas Stunning: An emerging alternative to CO₂ gassing, using nitrogen or argon to displace oxygen and cause rapid oxygen deprivation. As with other gas-based methods, death occurs before the release of blood.

• Firearm / Gunshot: Used mainly in on-farm or emergency slaughter situations rather than on industrial processing lines. While effective in causing immediate death, this method does not facilitate controlled bloodletting and therefore prevents the proper outflow of blood.

Summary Observation

While these methods are widely accepted within secular regulatory frameworks for efficiency and animal welfare, many of them result in the animal’s death occurring before any intentional bloodletting takes place. Under a Scriptural understanding of “strangulation,” such processes closely resemble the condition described as the taking of life without the proper release of blood — thereby placing their suitability into serious question for those who seek to honour the Apostolic and Torah-based instruction to abstain from blood.

It should be noted that the specific methods used in the killing of animals can vary greatly depending on country, supplier, facility, and regulatory standards, and in some cases it may not be immediately clear which techniques are employed. While the prevalence of certain practices within large-scale industrial systems is well documented, it is not always possible for the individual consumer to know with certainty how a particular animal was slaughtered.

Nevertheless, this uncertainty does not absolve believers of responsibility. For those who desire to walk faithfully in accordance with the Word of יהוה, attentiveness and discernment are required. It is therefore incumbent upon us to inquire, to research, and to speak with those who supply our meat — butchers, farmers, and providers — rather than to remain passive or plead ignorance. A willing heart seeks clarity, not convenience, and obedience is marked not by complacency, but by deliberate care in the things that honour Him.

Kosher and Conscious Practice

In light of the responsibility to avoid consuming blood and to remain attentive to how animal life is taken, it becomes necessary for believers to consider what practical steps may assist them in walking faithfully in this area.

Shechita, the Jewish method of slaughter, may be viewed as a prudent and conscientious option for those who wish to minimise the risk of consuming blood. While I am not asserting that this practice is the exact method prescribed in Scripture, it nevertheless reflects a deliberate effort to honour the principle that the blood should be released. The procedure involves a swift, uninterrupted cut across the throat with a perfectly sharpened blade, allowing the blood to flow out as freely as possible. In this sense, it aligns more closely with the Scriptural concern than many modern industrial alternatives.

By contrast, most contemporary slaughter methods do not prioritise bloodletting as their primary aim. Their focus tends to rest on efficiency, speed, and mechanical control, often resulting in death prior to any meaningful outflow of blood. For those seeking to act in obedience, such practices raise legitimate concern.

While not all believers may have access to kosher meat, nor feel compelled to adopt it exclusively, selecting it can serve as a practical safeguard for those who desire greater assurance that the blood has been properly released. It represents an intentional choice to err on the side of caution and reverence rather than convenience. Ultimately, the call is not to rigid ritualism, but to thoughtful obedience. The believer is encouraged to investigate, to ask questions, and to make informed decisions rooted in a sincere desire to honour יהוה. Whether through choosing kosher meat, sourcing from trusted local farmers, or seeking clarity regarding slaughter practices, the goal remains the same: to ensure that what is consumed has not crossed the boundary He has set. 

In this way, eating becomes not merely an act of sustenance, but an expression of faithfulness — a choice to honour the Word of יהוה even in the details of daily life.

Practical Guidance for Believers Today

In an age where meat processing is industrialised and distant from the consumer, diligence is essential. Practical steps include:

• Ask how the animal was killed. Was death caused by bleeding or by a method that ended life beforehand?

• Prefer slaughter methods that release the blood immediately.

• Be cautious with commercial meats, where slaughter methods may not be known.

• Favour small farms or traditional slaughter, where slaughter is known and bloodletting may be intentional.

• When uncertain — abstain. This is not extremism but reverence.

• Remember the heart: life belongs to יהוה and we must do as He has commanded us.

This command is not about ritualism but about honouring the sanctity of life and the authority of the One who gave it.

Conclusion

From the days of Noah, when יהוה first granted mankind permission to eat meat, the prohibition against consuming blood has stood as a clear and enduring boundary:

“... But do not eat flesh with its life, its blood.” — Genesis 9:4

This command is universal, moral, and enduring. It was reaffirmed within the Torah, upheld by the prophets, and declared necessary by the apostles for Gentiles who were turning to Aluhym. At no point is it presented as temporary, ceremonial, or conditional upon the existence of a sanctuary. Rather, it stands as a consistent instruction governing the manner in which life is to be handled in obedience to the One who gave it.

Methods of slaughter that bring about death before the proper release of blood correspond closely to what Scripture describes as “strangled,” and therefore fall within the scope of the same prohibition. The issue is not merely technical, but one of faithfulness to the boundary יהוה Himself has set.

If the life is in the blood, and יהוה has commanded that it not be consumed, then discernment in this matter is not optional, but essential. Where there is uncertainty, the faithful response is not justification or convenience, but restraint.

Daniel provides a clear pattern of such obedience. When he could not verify that the king’s food aligned with יהוה’s instruction, he refused to partake of it (Daniel 1:8). His abstention was not rooted in rebellion, but in faithfulness — and יהוה honoured his faithfulness with favour, wisdom, and blessing.

So too for believers today. To pour out the blood “like water” is not merely an act of procedure; it is an expression of obedience. It is reverence. It is a willingness to acknowledge that life does not belong to us, and that the Giver of life alone has the right to determine how it is to be handled.

In such attentiveness, even the act of eating becomes an act of devotion — a testimony that His Word governs not only our worship, but the ordinary rhythms of our daily lives.

May יהוה be with you and bless you.