Acts Ch 15 says to abstain from meats of strangled animals?


I have heard the explanation of this but why is this no longer required? I think it had to do with who it was adressed to at that time it had to do with who they were worshiping with did this so they did it as well.

I dont know can anyone explane it to me thanks?


While I am not certain this is accurate, I believe at the time, many pagans, when sacrificing animal, would strangle them rather than cut their throats. This was done because it was much cleaner.

So basically the commandment is not to eat meat of animals that had been sacrificed to pagan gods. (note the lower-case “g”.)




I don’t know of anywhere that processes meat these days that DOES use the method of strangling to slaughter the animals. For one thing the carcasses have to be bled anyway - the meat is horrible if they aren’t. For another thing it’d be terribly inefficient as a means of dispatching them. If it ain’t being done anyways, why any need to specifically regulate against it? :shrug:


But why are we no longer not alowed to stay around from blodd Verse 20?


You are overthinking this.

We are not required to abstain from these things any longer because they are no longer associated with idol worship and do not give scandal.

Remember, these are not divine prohibition but legislative prohibitions-- they are changeable.


I know I am but I have heard a really good reason for this. I just cant remember.

what you say may be true but it is not what I heard before. Im just looking for some explanations what you have given me may have to do



The Jews believed that Life was in the blood. If you look over the covenants, they are all sealed in blood. Jews were strictly forbidden from drinking blood, partly because the land of Canaan was full of pagan worship rituals that included this. This is one reason they got so offended when Jesus said they had to drink His blood.

In the early Church, there were many mixed churches composed of both Gentile Converts and Jews. The Gentiles were not careful about slaughter of animals so as to meet the conditions of orthodox Jews. Many of the Jews were offended by their dietary habits. Some of the Jews thought the Gentiles had to become Jewish converts in order to live as Christians. The Council in Jerusalem clarified these matters, and instructed the Gentiles in several matters that would help develop peace with the Jews in the community.

Hope that helps.


Personally, I believe we are still forbidden to eat any food that has been offered as sacrifice to pagan “gods”. Do I have any Church teaching to back that up? Nope not a one. But is just makes sense to me.

However, because of the trends in the culture in which I now live (the USA) I do not see this as much of a problem. On the other hand, I live in Oregon, so I still need to keep a weather eye out for such things.


This whole thing really confused the Jews too. The thing was, the law was added to teach us and point to Christ.

We were told the life was in the blood, this wan’t a biology textbook, it was pointing forward to something.

And that while God gave us the animals for food and such, life belonged to God. So you honored the order of things by giving the blood, the life to God.

And we know that no sin was forgiven without blood, without life, but we also know that no animal sacrifice ever paid for anyone’s sin.

Everything pointed towards Christ and his sacrifice. And the teaching still continues.

Where is the life? It is in the blood. What paid for our sins? The blood of Christ. What is the wine in the Lord’s Supper? The blood, Christ’s blood of the New Covenant given for the remission of sins.

So to this day, the life is in the blood. It belongs to God, and he gives us life through it.

We don’t turn back to the Old Covenant because it has been fulfilled, fulfilled in Christ. To turn back is to doubt the New.



Ok now it is starting to come to me. I think I remember what I originally heard.

This was a practice that the early Christians did to keep peace between Jews in the Christian community. It was a practice (discipline) for early Christians but never considered a sin.

Kind of like in the U.S. we no longer have to abstain from meat on Fridays. it is a discipline.

What do you think do I got a hang of this now?


1Co 8:7 However, not all possess this knowledge. But some, through being hitherto accustomed to idols, eat food as really offered to an idol; and their conscience, being weak, is defiled.
8 Food will not commend us to God. We are no worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do.
9 Only take care lest this liberty of yours somehow become a stumbling block to the weak.
10 For if any one sees you, a man of knowledge, at table in an idol’s temple, might he not be encouraged, if his conscience is weak, to eat food offered to idols?
11 And so by your knowledge this weak man is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ died.
12 Thus, sinning against your brethren and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ.

I believe that what Paul is saying here is that we shouldn’t eat meat offered to an idol if anyone perceives the possibility that the idol is somehow real.


The Jewish people did not practice Torah only religion. The had oral traditions which included the seven commandments of Noah. These rules were a set of moral interaction. The sixth or seventh rule, interestingly enough was not to tear the limb from a living animal. Apparently there were surrounding tribes who would ritualistically tear off a leg from a still live animal.

The Jewish Kosher laws had a manner of killing animals that not only promoted blood loss but was quick and less painful to the creature.

Strangling an animal to death would cause more suffering to the animal then the cutting of the throat that the Jewish Kosher laws outlined.

Yes, the Jewish people did not believe in consuming blood, but they also wanted to prevent unnecessary suffering to the animal.

Look up the Commandments of Noah. They are interesting.

I am not disagreeing with the interpretations of any of the previous commenters, I am just providing another layer.:slight_smile:


No, it WAS considered a sin at the very first, when it was possible, likely even, that a converted pagan would get the wrong idea about you eating food that had been sacrificed to an idol.

This is a pastoral application, imposed by Bishop James, based upon the general principle pronounced by Pope Peter in Acts 15.

Just like eating meat on Fridays, it’s a discipline and can be changed, yes. But the Church’s disciplines, based upon her power to bind or loose, has real power, and therefor it is a sin to break the disciplines while they are in effect.


never knew this thanks:thumbsup:


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit