The Law specifically said, “All the fat belongs to Jehovah . . . You must not eat any fat or any blood at all.”​—Le 3:3-17.

Not incumbent on Christians. After the Flood, when permission was given to Noah and his family to add flesh to their diet, nothing was stated regarding fat. (Ge 9:3, 4) However, the eating of blood was prohibited. This was more than 850 years before the Law covenant, with its prohibitions against the eating of both blood and fat, was made with Israel. In the first century C.E. the governing body of the Christian congregation confirmed the prohibition against blood as remaining in force for Christians. (Ac 15:20, 28, 29) As in the case with Noah and his family, however, nothing was stated concerning the eating of fat by Christians. Thus, the law against eating fat was given only to the nation of Israel.

Reason for the law. Under the Law covenant, both the blood and fat were looked upon as exclusively Jehovah’s. The blood contains the life, which only Jehovah can give; therefore it belongs to him. (Le 17:11, 14) The fat was viewed as the richest part of the flesh of the animal. The offering of the fat of the animal would evidently be in recognition of the fact that the best parts belong to Jehovah, who provides abundantly, and it would demonstrate the desire of the worshiper to offer the best to God. Because it was symbolic of the Israelites’ devotion of their best to Jehovah, it was said to smoke upon the altar as “food” and for “a restful odor” to him. (Le 3:11, 16) To eat fat, therefore, was an illegal appropriation of what was sanctified to God, an invasion of the rights of Jehovah. Eating fat would incur the death penalty. Unlike blood, however, fat could be used for other purposes, at least in the case of an animal that died of itself or was killed by another beast.​—Le 7:23-25.

Extent of the law’s application. Because of this latter text, many commentators have sought to limit the prohibition of Leviticus 3:17 only to the fat of those kinds of animals that were acceptable for offering in sacrifice, such as bulls, sheep, and goats. Rabbinic Jewish teaching is divided on this subject. However, the injunction on fat at Leviticus 3:17 is linked with the one regarding the eating of blood, a law that clearly included the blood of all animals. (Compare Le 17:13; De 12:15, 16.) It seems more consistent, therefore, that the law on fat should also have embraced the fat of all animals, including those killed for the Israelites’ common use.

The view that the prohibition applied to all fat is not controverted by the text at Deuteronomy 32:14, which speaks of Jehovah as giving Israel “fat of rams” to eat. This is a figurative expression referring to the best of the flock, or as The Jerusalem Bible renders the phrase, “rich food of the pastures.” (See also Da ftn and Kx.) This poetic sense is indicated by later portions of the same verse referring to “the kidney fat of wheat” and “the blood of the grape.” So, too, with Nehemiah 8:10, where the people are commanded, “Go, eat the fatty things,” we are not to conclude that they literally consumed whole fat. “Fatty things” refers to rich portions, things not skinny or dry, but luscious, including tasty items prepared with vegetable oils. Thus, Knox’ translation here reads “regale yourselves with rich meat,” while Moffatt’s translation says “eat the dainty pieces.”

The Mosaic Law restriction did not prevent the feeding or fattening of sheep or cattle for the table. We read of the “fattened young bull” slaughtered for the prodigal son. (Lu 15:23) Solomon’s food included “fattened cuckoos” and cattle. (1Ki 4:23) The Hebrew ʽe·ghel-mar·beqʹ, translated “fattened calf,” occurs at 1 Samuel 28:24; meʹach and meriʼʹ refer to a ‘well-fed animal’ or a ‘fatling.’ (Isa 5:17; Eze 39:18) However, this does not mean that this ‘fattening’ was for the purpose of producing suet or layers of fat; rather, the sense again is that the animals became full-fleshed (“beefy”), not skinny.​—Compare Ge 41:18, 19.