Happy INC Day Everyone!
Today is the Iglesia ni Cristo's 95th anniversary and in honor of this, I decided to find out why this church's doctrine forbids the eating of animal blood as contained in yummy Filipino dishes such as dinuguan and pinikpikan. My only recourse was to do my research on the interwebz and just like how I've been taught to trawl for porn and torrent sites, I used good ol' Google and did a search using "INC" and "animal blood" as my key words.
Some of the results I got were links to forums and clicking on these, I was shocked into recalling how vitriolic and hostile the debate between the INC and Catholics remains. Just to get a flavor on the level of sophistication has been set on this discourse between the two factions, here's a link to one of the forums.
So why does the INC forbid partaking of blood? From what I've been able to discern from all the trash talking and ad hominem debating tactics, the basis for this eating taboo can be found (surprise!) in the bible. Specifically, in Leviticus 17 of the Old Testament which sets out the dietary restrictions of the Holiness Code for the Israelites. Verses 10 to 13 require the following:
10 " Suppose someone eats meat that still has blood in it. It does not matter whether he is an Israelite or an outsider. I will turn against him if he eats it. I will cut him off from his people.
11 The life of each creature is in its blood. So I have given you the blood of animals to pay for your sin on the altar. Blood is life. That is why blood pays for your sin.
12 So I say to the people of Israel, 'You must not eat meat that still has blood in it. And an outsider who lives among you must not eat it either.'
13 Suppose any of you hunts any animal or bird that can be eaten. It does not matter whether you are an Israelite or an outsider. You must let the blood flow out of the animal or bird. You must cover the blood with dirt."
An aside: Leviticus also contains the sexual restrictions of the Holiness Code in Chapter 18 of the book. How confused were these people that laws had to be implemented to set out their faith's stance on having sex with their mothers and/or animals? The position, by the way, is not to have sex with either/both.
Anyway, why did the INC parse this particular part of Levititus to dictate a ban on eating animal blood -- I mean to the exclusion of other parts of the bible, most notably, perhaps, the New Testament? I don't know. It's curious though that it is so and the whole context, historical or religious, of this dietary requirement was apparently lost on the INC.
It is not my intention to pick a fight and be self-righteous on this by saying that the INC is wrong on this taboo. It boils down to everyone's personal beliefs and preferences. We live in a democracy and have the free will to believe in anything we want. And certainly this freedom includes and must provide room for atheists. As for me, there must be no persecution of people who do not believe in God or a god. The debate on this should continue for a long time. What is irrefutable though is the existence of Satan. Yes, the chief evil spirit lives and breathes among us. The Devil. Lucifer. The Anti-Christ. How do I know? Well, watch her give her State of the Nation address this afternoon.