u/Sad-Adagio9182

So I've been wondering about this passage:

Hebrews 10:26-29 ESV [26] For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, [27] but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries. [28] Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. [29] How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace?

So it seems to be about an unforgivable sin that involves sinning deliberately. It also contains a reference to the blood of the covenant, which presumably refers to the blood that Jesus shed on the cross.

Now, some denominations teach that Jesus' body and blood are somehow present in the Holy Communion, whether physically or spiritually. As such, could the "blood of the covenant" also refer to the Holy Communion? Under such an interpretation, a behavior that shows a lack of respect for the Holy Communion would also "profane the blood of the covenant". (Reading the preceding verse, verse 25 also says to "not give up meeting together", and meeting together often involves the Holy Communion.)

This question of mine has something to do with something that happened earlier this month, but for now, I think it's more important to focus on the interpretation of this Bible passage. On one hand, I certainly do think it's important to treat the Holy Communion with respect (though, given the past incident, I'm also not sure what exactly that means). On the other hand, I've also come across other interpretations of the passage. While some of these interpretations seem to fit better, it may also be that some passages can be interpreted in more than one way. So is the interpretation I gave really valid, or am I just thinking too much?

So I live in a country where blood used to be banned as food, but is now allowed, which led many restaurants to add blood dishes to their menus. This leads me to wonder if Christians can eat blood. While I personally don't have any desire to try out any of those dishes, my job does involve working with these restaurants, and I certainly shouldn't help them with things I'm not supposed to eat.

The understanding I grew up with was that Christians are not supposed to eat blood, because the council in Acts 15 has decided that we should abstain from blood. But then I found out that many Christians think that this decision was only temporary, made to preserve unity between Jews and Gentiles, and went out of effect as times and cultures changed. But in Genesis 9, even before God gave the Torah to Moses, he had already commanded Noah not to eat meat with blood in it. So this seems to imply that the command not to eat blood was more universal than the commands given to Moses. Though I might be reading too much into this detail...

One more interesting I've been wondering is, since blood vessels are found all over the body, would that mean that all meat contains a small amount of blood, especially the organs? My biological knowledge isn't enough to answer this decisively, but I find it interesting to think about.

So I live in a country where blood used to be banned as food, but is now allowed, which led many restaurants to add blood dishes to their menus. This leads me to wonder if Christians can eat blood. While I personally don't have any desire to try out any of those dishes, my job does involve working with these restaurants, and I certainly shouldn't help them with things I'm not supposed to eat.

The understanding I grew up with was that Christians are not supposed to eat blood, because the council in Acts 15 has decided that we should abstain from blood. But then I found out that many Christians think that this decision was only temporary, made to preserve unity between Jews and Gentiles, and went out of effect as times and cultures changed. But in Genesis 9, even before God gave the Torah to Moses, he had already commanded Noah not to eat meat with blood in it. So this seems to imply that the command not to eat blood was more universal than the commands given to Moses. Though I might be reading too much into this detail...

One more interesting I've been wondering is, since blood vessels are found all over the body, would that mean that all meat contains a small amount of blood, especially the organs? My biological knowledge isn't enough to answer this decisively, but I find it interesting to think about.

So I'm now in my early 20s, but I've never before taken a piano exam. I'm thinking of taking one someday, so that I can be sure of what grade I'm in. But since I'm pretty busy right now, I'm also thinking if it might be better not to take any exams. So I'm wondering how common it is, among piano learners, to never take any music exams.