Winstein--12
Some information about blood removal
Even by current methods that are very effective at bleeding an animal (cutting
deeply across the animal's throat,
its body held so its head hangs downward),
50-58% of the blood is left in it.
"Aspects of Meat Inspection," 1973,
Horace Thornton, E.V.S.C., D.V.H.,
F.R.S.H., chap.2;
"Meat Science," 1974, Ralston A. Lawrie, Ph.d., D.Sc., F.R.S.E.,
F.F.S.T., pp.
132-133
The scriptures don't give a method of slaughtering or of blood removal beyond
slaughter. Interpretation
could be imagined a couple of basic ways. To be a
proper generalization, a ban on the blood of meat would need to
refer to some-
thing more than half of the blood. Another imaginable interpretation would be
that a follower needed
to try to remove all of it, which would be like the oth-
er food bans which meant you weren't to eat the banned foods at
all.
More could be removed after slaughter by cooking--some methods help remove
blood, other seal in the juices.
But the Bible doesn't require that the meat be
cooked a certain way or even at all.
The JWs leaders' interpretations about the Bible regarding blood/blood trans-
fusions include that the amount
of blood that is removed during slaughter,
around half of it, is the least amount that should be removed before eating
ani-
mal meat.
After the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, the Pharisees sect led the Jewish
people to what became known
as Rabbinic Judaism--traditional Judaism. Previous
to that, the main objection to the Pharisees views came from the
Saducees sect,
such as in the Saducees rejection of oral law. According to Josephus, most Jews
were non-sectarian,
but the Pharisees had the support of the people.
Apostle Paul was originally a Pharisee. As a Christian, he maintained some
of his beliefs although he
knew and taught that Christians weren't obligated to
Mosaic law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharisees
Paul would perform Jewish rituals, or encourage other Christians to perform
them, to appease Jewish people
who required it to socialize with them and dis-
cuss their religious concerns. That's what's meant at Acts 16:1-6,
which says
Paul had Timothy, a Christian whose mother was Jewish, get circumcised because
of the Jews.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts%2016&version=49
The 5th order of the Mishnah, the Kodashim, contains the tractate the Chullin,
which explains the ritual concerns
of the slaughter of animals and birds, and
the soaking, salting, and rinsing, sometimes broiling (such as for liver) used
to
remove all or practically all of the rest of the blood.
In trying to kill the animal in as painless a way as possible, one of the ear-
ly traditions was to have the
animal lie down for slaughter; this was to prevent
an upward or downward motion of the knife.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shechita
In addition to the two Jewish law concerns, slaughter and degree of blood re-
moval beyond that, given above,
the flow of blood from the animal during the
slaughter was called the blood of life, and the penalty for eating it was
to be
cut off (for "cut off" see p.42--I'm not sure, but it was probably excommunica-
tion to be cut off when the death
penalty wasn't expressed as well).
http://glenster1.webs.com/gtjbrooklyn42.htm
Even though Jesus didn't oblige his pre-crucifixion followers to abide by the
Jewish oral law (pp.26,27), many
Jewish people of the time believed in it, in-
cluding that it clarified which degree of blood removal was required by the
written
law. Whatever that clarification was, Jesus and his followers aren't
given as offending the Jewish law followers
for eating meat with more blood in
it than the others thought was allowable.
