[font=Georgia]-
Hello;
Seeing as how this area is set up for people with an urge to express their
opinions rather than argue back and forth in endless disputes that never get
to the bottom of anything; I'm taking advantage of the relatively peaceable
environment hereabouts to post my thoughts on a variety of Bible subjects;
beginning with the one below.
Light
In the April 2014 edition of Discover magazine, astrophysicist/cosmologist
Avi Loeb stated that the Bible attributes the appearance of stars and
galaxies to the divine proclamation "Let there be light". Is Mr. Loeb's
statement correct? No; of course not. God created light on the very first day
of creation; while luminous celestial objects weren't created until the fourth.
The Bible is notoriously concise in some places; especially in it's story of the
creation of light. Well; the creation of light was a very, very intricate
process. First God had to create particulate matter, and along with those
particles their specific properties, including mass. Then He had to invent
laws to govern how matter behaves in combination with and/or in the
presence of, other kinds of matter in order to generate photons.
The same laws that make it possible for matter to generate photons also
make other conditions possible too; e.g. fire, wind, water, ice, soil, rain, life,
centrifugal force, thermodynamics, fusion, dark energy, gravity, atoms,
organic molecules, magnetism, radiation, high energy X-rays and gamma
rays, temperature, pressure, force, inertia, sound, friction, and electricity; et
al. So the creation of light was a pretty big deal; yet Genesis scarcely gives
its origin passing mention.
†. Gen 1:1-2 . .The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the
surface of the deep
That statement reveals the cosmos' condition prior to the creation of light;
and no mystery there because sans the natural laws that make light
possible, the cosmos' particulate matter would never have coalesced into
something coherent.
2Cor 4:6 verifies that light wasn't introduced into the cosmos from outside in
order to dispel the darkness and brighten things up a bit; but rather, it
radiated out of the cosmos from inside-- from itself --indicating that the
cosmos was created to be self-illuminating by means of the various
interactions of the matter that God made for it; including, but not limited to,
the Higgs Boson.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=[/font]
What I Think
Moderator: Moderators
-
WebersHome
- Guru
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:10 am
- Location: Oregon
- Been thanked: 24 times
-
WebersHome
- Guru
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:10 am
- Location: Oregon
- Been thanked: 24 times
Post #41
[font=Verdana]-
How People Stay In Heaven
I should think that producing enough piety during one's lifetime in order to
get to heaven would be really hard. But people who make it to heaven don't
face a lifetime; no, they're facing eternity. Producing piety for that long has
to be even harder.
According to Rom 2:6-11, people's piety has to be consistent. In other
words: there's no reward for complying with some of God's wishes some of
the time, nor even most of His wishes most of the time. No, people have to
comply with all of His wishes all the time in order to stay in heaven; no
slacking off-- people have to give it everything they've got.
†. Mark 12:30 . . You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and
with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.
Christ is the lucky one. Piety is second nature to him. Christ doesn't even
have to work at it because he was born with the nature of God rather than
only the nature of a human. That's quite an advantage over the rest of us.
†. 1John 3:8 . .Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed
remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.
According to Rom 6:23, the wages of sin is death. Well; if the wages of sin is
death down here, wouldn't the wages of sin be death up there too? I can't
imagine why not. So then, it seems to me that people in heaven are living
under a sword of Damocles, hanging by a slender thread easily broken by
the slightest impiety; and thus finding themselves booted out of heaven
right quick.
Human nature being what it is, the obvious solution to this dilemma is to
take people right back to square #1 and route them through birth all over
again. Only next time, instead of them born with human nature; they'd be
born with the nature of God, so that piety would be second nature to them
just like it is for Christ; because unless God can say about ordinary people
"this is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased" like He says about
Christ; they are not going to stay in heaven for very long.
Is what I'm talking about a possibility? Yes; it certainly is.
†. 2Pet 1:3-5 . . His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to
life and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His
own glory and excellence. For by these He has granted to us His precious
and magnificent promises, in order that by them you might become
partakers of the divine nature.
Routing through another birth all over again isn't optional. No; it's a must.
†. John 3:3 . . Jesus declared: I tell you the truth, no one can see the
kingdom of God unless he is born again.
†. John 3:7 . . Do not wonder that I said to you: You must be born again.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=[/font]
How People Stay In Heaven
I should think that producing enough piety during one's lifetime in order to
get to heaven would be really hard. But people who make it to heaven don't
face a lifetime; no, they're facing eternity. Producing piety for that long has
to be even harder.
According to Rom 2:6-11, people's piety has to be consistent. In other
words: there's no reward for complying with some of God's wishes some of
the time, nor even most of His wishes most of the time. No, people have to
comply with all of His wishes all the time in order to stay in heaven; no
slacking off-- people have to give it everything they've got.
†. Mark 12:30 . . You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and
with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.
Christ is the lucky one. Piety is second nature to him. Christ doesn't even
have to work at it because he was born with the nature of God rather than
only the nature of a human. That's quite an advantage over the rest of us.
†. 1John 3:8 . .Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed
remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.
According to Rom 6:23, the wages of sin is death. Well; if the wages of sin is
death down here, wouldn't the wages of sin be death up there too? I can't
imagine why not. So then, it seems to me that people in heaven are living
under a sword of Damocles, hanging by a slender thread easily broken by
the slightest impiety; and thus finding themselves booted out of heaven
right quick.
Human nature being what it is, the obvious solution to this dilemma is to
take people right back to square #1 and route them through birth all over
again. Only next time, instead of them born with human nature; they'd be
born with the nature of God, so that piety would be second nature to them
just like it is for Christ; because unless God can say about ordinary people
"this is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased" like He says about
Christ; they are not going to stay in heaven for very long.
Is what I'm talking about a possibility? Yes; it certainly is.
†. 2Pet 1:3-5 . . His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to
life and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His
own glory and excellence. For by these He has granted to us His precious
and magnificent promises, in order that by them you might become
partakers of the divine nature.
Routing through another birth all over again isn't optional. No; it's a must.
†. John 3:3 . . Jesus declared: I tell you the truth, no one can see the
kingdom of God unless he is born again.
†. John 3:7 . . Do not wonder that I said to you: You must be born again.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=[/font]
-
WebersHome
- Guru
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:10 am
- Location: Oregon
- Been thanked: 24 times
Post #42
[font=Verdana]-
Female Pastors, Preachers, and Teachers
NOTE: The comments below pertain specifically to Christian leadership
within the Christian community, rather than to leadership in general
throughout the world community. In other words: the comments below
should not be construed to apply to Hillary Clinton's run for the office of US
President.
Christ's apostles speak for Christ; and obeying them is a walk pleasing to
God.
†. 1Cor 14:37 . . If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let
him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the
commandments of The Lord.
†. 1Ths 4:1-2 . .We beseech you, brethren, and exhort you by the Lord
Jesus, that as ye have received of us how ye ought to walk and to please
God, so ye would abound more and more. For ye know what commandments
we gave you by the Lord Jesus.
Seeing as how the apostles' commandments are Christ's commandments,
then refusal to obey an apostle is all the same as refusal to obey Christ. It's
a domino effect all the way to the top.
†. Luke 10:16 . .Whoever listens to you; listens to me. Whoever rejects you;
rejects me. And whoever rejects me; rejects the one who sent me.
Therefore, these next commandments are not just one man's opinion; but
are Christ's wishes, and being so, are God's too.
†. 1Cor 11:3 . . But I would have you know, that the head of every man is
Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is
God.
†. 1Cor 14:34-35 . . Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is
not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under
obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn anything, let them ask
their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
†. 1Tim 2:11-12 . . Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I
suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be
in silence.
People who refuse to obey those commandments are no better than pagans
practicing dark arts and/or worshipping Shiva and Vishnu.
†. 1Sam 15:23 . . Rebellion is as the sin of divination, and insubordination is
as iniquity and idolatry.
They're Christ's enemies.
†. John 15:14 . .You are my friends if you do as I wish.
And they're disloyal too.
†. John 14:15 . . If you love me, you will comply with what I command.
†. John 14:21 . .Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one
who loves me.
†. John 14:23-24 . . If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching . . He who
does not love me will not obey my teaching.
Their insubordination insinuates that God is off His rocker.
†. 2Pet 3:15-16 . . Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him.
Q: What about Deborah? God appointed her to lead men. (Jdgs 4:4-5:31)
A: Rebels are fond of pointing to Old Testament female luminaries like
Deborah to justify Christian women leading Christian men. But they need to
wake up and get their bearings. Deborah wasn't a Christian; and besides:
she lived in the Old Testament era.
That ship has sailed and we today live in the New Testament era-- an era
where Christ's wishes reign supreme. Male leadership may not be ideal; but
the bottom line is: males are Christ's gender of choice; and it is his Father's
wishes that people follow His son's lead.
†. Matt 17:5 . .Behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them; and behold, a
voice out of the cloud, saying: This is My beloved son, with whom I am well
pleased. Listen to him!
†. John 3:36 . . He who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the
wrath of God abides on him.
You know why the issue of Christian women leading Christian men is so
controversial? It's because far more Christians are worldly than heavenly;
they're living the Christian life according to the standards of their culture,
and according to their feelings, instead of according to Christ's wishes; viz:
they're carnal instead of spiritual; and apparently content to be that way.
†. Rom 8:5-8 . .Those who live according to the sinful nature have their
minds set on what that nature desires; but those who live in accordance with
the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. The mind of sinful
man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace; the
sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do
so. Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God.
Christianity isn't everyone's cup of tea. If people find Christ's rules too strict,
too old fashioned and/or too contrary to their culture, then maybe they
ought to take up something else, like maybe Buddhism or Yoga meditation.
But one thing no one should do is follow Christ with the thought of setting
him straight or bringing him up to date. You see, that would be the sin of
heresy, which is a sin that merits ostracizing.
†. Rom 16:17 . .Watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles
in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away
from them.
Stubborn cases of heresy require excommunication.
†. Titus 3:10-11 . . Reject a divisive person after the first and second
admonition, knowing that such a person is warped and sinning, being self
condemned.
Some Christian churches are so insubordinate that they mirror the church of
Laodicea where Christ is depicted outside the building at Rev 3:14-22
banging on the door trying to get someone's attention to let him in. A
Christian church without Christ at the helm is a fish out of water. For all
intents and purposes, it's little more than a religious social club.
†. 1John 5:3-4 . . For this is the love of God: that we keep His
commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=[/font]
Female Pastors, Preachers, and Teachers
NOTE: The comments below pertain specifically to Christian leadership
within the Christian community, rather than to leadership in general
throughout the world community. In other words: the comments below
should not be construed to apply to Hillary Clinton's run for the office of US
President.
Christ's apostles speak for Christ; and obeying them is a walk pleasing to
God.
†. 1Cor 14:37 . . If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let
him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the
commandments of The Lord.
†. 1Ths 4:1-2 . .We beseech you, brethren, and exhort you by the Lord
Jesus, that as ye have received of us how ye ought to walk and to please
God, so ye would abound more and more. For ye know what commandments
we gave you by the Lord Jesus.
Seeing as how the apostles' commandments are Christ's commandments,
then refusal to obey an apostle is all the same as refusal to obey Christ. It's
a domino effect all the way to the top.
†. Luke 10:16 . .Whoever listens to you; listens to me. Whoever rejects you;
rejects me. And whoever rejects me; rejects the one who sent me.
Therefore, these next commandments are not just one man's opinion; but
are Christ's wishes, and being so, are God's too.
†. 1Cor 11:3 . . But I would have you know, that the head of every man is
Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is
God.
†. 1Cor 14:34-35 . . Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is
not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under
obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn anything, let them ask
their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
†. 1Tim 2:11-12 . . Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I
suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be
in silence.
People who refuse to obey those commandments are no better than pagans
practicing dark arts and/or worshipping Shiva and Vishnu.
†. 1Sam 15:23 . . Rebellion is as the sin of divination, and insubordination is
as iniquity and idolatry.
They're Christ's enemies.
†. John 15:14 . .You are my friends if you do as I wish.
And they're disloyal too.
†. John 14:15 . . If you love me, you will comply with what I command.
†. John 14:21 . .Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one
who loves me.
†. John 14:23-24 . . If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching . . He who
does not love me will not obey my teaching.
Their insubordination insinuates that God is off His rocker.
†. 2Pet 3:15-16 . . Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him.
Q: What about Deborah? God appointed her to lead men. (Jdgs 4:4-5:31)
A: Rebels are fond of pointing to Old Testament female luminaries like
Deborah to justify Christian women leading Christian men. But they need to
wake up and get their bearings. Deborah wasn't a Christian; and besides:
she lived in the Old Testament era.
That ship has sailed and we today live in the New Testament era-- an era
where Christ's wishes reign supreme. Male leadership may not be ideal; but
the bottom line is: males are Christ's gender of choice; and it is his Father's
wishes that people follow His son's lead.
†. Matt 17:5 . .Behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them; and behold, a
voice out of the cloud, saying: This is My beloved son, with whom I am well
pleased. Listen to him!
†. John 3:36 . . He who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the
wrath of God abides on him.
You know why the issue of Christian women leading Christian men is so
controversial? It's because far more Christians are worldly than heavenly;
they're living the Christian life according to the standards of their culture,
and according to their feelings, instead of according to Christ's wishes; viz:
they're carnal instead of spiritual; and apparently content to be that way.
†. Rom 8:5-8 . .Those who live according to the sinful nature have their
minds set on what that nature desires; but those who live in accordance with
the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. The mind of sinful
man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace; the
sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do
so. Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God.
Christianity isn't everyone's cup of tea. If people find Christ's rules too strict,
too old fashioned and/or too contrary to their culture, then maybe they
ought to take up something else, like maybe Buddhism or Yoga meditation.
But one thing no one should do is follow Christ with the thought of setting
him straight or bringing him up to date. You see, that would be the sin of
heresy, which is a sin that merits ostracizing.
†. Rom 16:17 . .Watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles
in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away
from them.
Stubborn cases of heresy require excommunication.
†. Titus 3:10-11 . . Reject a divisive person after the first and second
admonition, knowing that such a person is warped and sinning, being self
condemned.
Some Christian churches are so insubordinate that they mirror the church of
Laodicea where Christ is depicted outside the building at Rev 3:14-22
banging on the door trying to get someone's attention to let him in. A
Christian church without Christ at the helm is a fish out of water. For all
intents and purposes, it's little more than a religious social club.
†. 1John 5:3-4 . . For this is the love of God: that we keep His
commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=[/font]
-
WebersHome
- Guru
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:10 am
- Location: Oregon
- Been thanked: 24 times
Post #43
[font=Verdana]-
Christ And The Priesthood Order Of Melchizedek
Melchizedek was a high priest of the Most High God in the book of Genesis
contemporary with Abraham. (Gen 14:18-20)
Mel, along with Abraham, existed prior to the covenanted law that Yhvh's
people agreed upon with God as per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and
Deuteronomy. This is very important seeing as how according to the Bible,
law enacted ex post facto isn't retroactive.
†. Deut 5:2-4 . .Yhvh our God made a covenant with us at Horeb. Yhvh did
not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us, with all those of us
alive here today.
†. Rom 4:15 . . Law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no
transgression.
†. Rom 5:13 . . Sin is not imputed when there is no law.
†. Gal 3:17. .The Law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does
not invalidate a covenant previously ratified by God.
That being the case, then Melchizedek's constituents-- among whom was
Abraham --were immune to the consequences stipulated for breaking the
covenant's law as per Ex 34:6-7, Lev 26:3-38, Deut 27:15-26, and Deut
28:1-69.
Christ's priesthood is patterned after Melchizedek's (Ps 110:4, Heb 5:5-6).
So then, seeing as how Melchizedek and his constituents-- which included
Abraham --were immune to the curses stipulated for breaking the covenant's
law, then Christ and his constituents are immune to the curses too. In a
nutshell: neither Christ nor his followers can be sent to hell for breaking the
Ten Commandments.
†. John 5:24 . . I assure you: those who listen to my message, and believe
in God who sent me, have eternal life. They will never be condemned for
their sins, but they have already passed from death into life.
Another advantage of Christ's priesthood is its continuity.
Take for example Judaism's priesthood. No one has benefited from its
services since Titus destroyed Jerusalem in 70ad. Which means of course
that 1,946 years worth of Yom Kippurs have been merely for show because
the Day Of Atonement cannot be observed properly and effectively without a
fully functioning priesthood.
In contrast: Christ's priesthood isn't effected by wars, and/or geopolitics. He
officiates in heaven where nothing happening on earth can reach to either
interfere with, or interrupt, his services (Heb 8:1-4). And seeing as how
Christ rose from the dead immortal (Rom 6:9, Heb 7:3, Rev 1:18) then old
age and death will never be a factor in either the length or the effectiveness
of his priesthood tenure.
†. Heb 7:24-25 . . He, on the other hand, because he abides forever, holds
his priesthood permanently. Hence, also, he is able to save forever those
who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make
intercession for them.
FYI: The order of Melchizedek is a "high priest" order (Heb 5:10, Heb 6:20).
Well; the Bible limits the number of high priests in office at a time to just
one; and the man stays in office till he's dead before being replaced-- which
of course won't happen with Christ seeing as how he rose from the dead
immortal.
Point being: Mormonism's over-crowded order of Melchizedek is unbiblical:
and so, for that matter, is Mormonism's order of Aaron seeing as how his is
the office of a high priest too.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=[/font]
Christ And The Priesthood Order Of Melchizedek
Melchizedek was a high priest of the Most High God in the book of Genesis
contemporary with Abraham. (Gen 14:18-20)
Mel, along with Abraham, existed prior to the covenanted law that Yhvh's
people agreed upon with God as per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and
Deuteronomy. This is very important seeing as how according to the Bible,
law enacted ex post facto isn't retroactive.
†. Deut 5:2-4 . .Yhvh our God made a covenant with us at Horeb. Yhvh did
not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us, with all those of us
alive here today.
†. Rom 4:15 . . Law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no
transgression.
†. Rom 5:13 . . Sin is not imputed when there is no law.
†. Gal 3:17. .The Law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does
not invalidate a covenant previously ratified by God.
That being the case, then Melchizedek's constituents-- among whom was
Abraham --were immune to the consequences stipulated for breaking the
covenant's law as per Ex 34:6-7, Lev 26:3-38, Deut 27:15-26, and Deut
28:1-69.
Christ's priesthood is patterned after Melchizedek's (Ps 110:4, Heb 5:5-6).
So then, seeing as how Melchizedek and his constituents-- which included
Abraham --were immune to the curses stipulated for breaking the covenant's
law, then Christ and his constituents are immune to the curses too. In a
nutshell: neither Christ nor his followers can be sent to hell for breaking the
Ten Commandments.
†. John 5:24 . . I assure you: those who listen to my message, and believe
in God who sent me, have eternal life. They will never be condemned for
their sins, but they have already passed from death into life.
Another advantage of Christ's priesthood is its continuity.
Take for example Judaism's priesthood. No one has benefited from its
services since Titus destroyed Jerusalem in 70ad. Which means of course
that 1,946 years worth of Yom Kippurs have been merely for show because
the Day Of Atonement cannot be observed properly and effectively without a
fully functioning priesthood.
In contrast: Christ's priesthood isn't effected by wars, and/or geopolitics. He
officiates in heaven where nothing happening on earth can reach to either
interfere with, or interrupt, his services (Heb 8:1-4). And seeing as how
Christ rose from the dead immortal (Rom 6:9, Heb 7:3, Rev 1:18) then old
age and death will never be a factor in either the length or the effectiveness
of his priesthood tenure.
†. Heb 7:24-25 . . He, on the other hand, because he abides forever, holds
his priesthood permanently. Hence, also, he is able to save forever those
who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make
intercession for them.
FYI: The order of Melchizedek is a "high priest" order (Heb 5:10, Heb 6:20).
Well; the Bible limits the number of high priests in office at a time to just
one; and the man stays in office till he's dead before being replaced-- which
of course won't happen with Christ seeing as how he rose from the dead
immortal.
Point being: Mormonism's over-crowded order of Melchizedek is unbiblical:
and so, for that matter, is Mormonism's order of Aaron seeing as how his is
the office of a high priest too.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=[/font]
-
WebersHome
- Guru
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:10 am
- Location: Oregon
- Been thanked: 24 times
Post #44
[font=Verdana]-
Christ And The Priesthood Order Of Melchizedek
Melchizedek was a high priest of the Most High God in the book of Genesis
contemporary with Abraham. (Gen 14:18-20)
Mel, along with Abraham, existed prior to the covenanted law that Yhvh's
people agreed upon with God as per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and
Deuteronomy. This is very important seeing as how according to the Bible,
law enacted ex post facto isn't retroactive.
†. Deut 5:2-4 . .Yhvh our God made a covenant with us at Horeb. Yhvh did
not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us, with all those of us
alive here today.
†. Rom 4:15 . . Law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no
transgression.
†. Rom 5:13 . . Sin is not imputed when there is no law.
†. Gal 3:17. .The Law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does
not invalidate a covenant previously ratified by God.
That being the case, then Melchizedek's constituents-- among whom was
Abraham --were immune to the consequences stipulated for breaking the
covenant's law as per Ex 34:6-7, Lev 26:3-38, Deut 27:15-26, and Deut
28:1-69.
Christ's priesthood is patterned after Melchizedek's (Ps 110:4, Heb 5:5-6).
So then, seeing as how Melchizedek and his constituents-- which included
Abraham --were immune to the curses stipulated for breaking the covenant's
law, then Christ and his constituents are immune to the curses too. In a
nutshell: neither Christ nor his followers can be sent to hell for breaking the
Ten Commandments.
Another advantage of Christ's priesthood is its continuity.
Take for example Judaism's priesthood. No one has benefited from its
services since Titus destroyed Jerusalem in 70ad. Which means of course
that 1,946 years worth of Yom Kippurs have been merely for show because
the Day Of Atonement cannot be observed properly and effectively without a
fully functioning priesthood.
In contrast: Christ's priesthood isn't effected by wars, and/or geopolitics. He
officiates in heaven where nothing happening on earth can reach to either
interfere with, or interrupt, his services (Heb 8:1-4). And seeing as how
Christ rose from the dead immortal (Rom 6:9, Heb 7:3, Rev 1:18) then old
age and death will never be a factor in either the length or the effectiveness
of his priesthood tenure.
†. Heb 7:24-25 . . He, on the other hand, because he abides forever, holds
his priesthood permanently. Hence, also, he is able to save forever those
who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make
intercession for them.
FYI: The order of Melchizedek is a "high priest" order (Heb 5:10, Heb 6:20).
Well; the Bible limits the number of high priests in office at a time to just
one; and the man stays in office till he's dead before being replaced-- which
of course won't happen with Christ seeing as how he rose from the dead
immortal.
Point being: Mormonism's over-crowded order of Melchizedek is unbiblical:
and so, for that matter, is Mormonism's order of Aaron seeing as how his is
the office of a high priest too.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=[/font]
Christ And The Priesthood Order Of Melchizedek
Melchizedek was a high priest of the Most High God in the book of Genesis
contemporary with Abraham. (Gen 14:18-20)
Mel, along with Abraham, existed prior to the covenanted law that Yhvh's
people agreed upon with God as per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and
Deuteronomy. This is very important seeing as how according to the Bible,
law enacted ex post facto isn't retroactive.
†. Deut 5:2-4 . .Yhvh our God made a covenant with us at Horeb. Yhvh did
not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us, with all those of us
alive here today.
†. Rom 4:15 . . Law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no
transgression.
†. Rom 5:13 . . Sin is not imputed when there is no law.
†. Gal 3:17. .The Law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does
not invalidate a covenant previously ratified by God.
That being the case, then Melchizedek's constituents-- among whom was
Abraham --were immune to the consequences stipulated for breaking the
covenant's law as per Ex 34:6-7, Lev 26:3-38, Deut 27:15-26, and Deut
28:1-69.
Christ's priesthood is patterned after Melchizedek's (Ps 110:4, Heb 5:5-6).
So then, seeing as how Melchizedek and his constituents-- which included
Abraham --were immune to the curses stipulated for breaking the covenant's
law, then Christ and his constituents are immune to the curses too. In a
nutshell: neither Christ nor his followers can be sent to hell for breaking the
Ten Commandments.
Another advantage of Christ's priesthood is its continuity.
Take for example Judaism's priesthood. No one has benefited from its
services since Titus destroyed Jerusalem in 70ad. Which means of course
that 1,946 years worth of Yom Kippurs have been merely for show because
the Day Of Atonement cannot be observed properly and effectively without a
fully functioning priesthood.
In contrast: Christ's priesthood isn't effected by wars, and/or geopolitics. He
officiates in heaven where nothing happening on earth can reach to either
interfere with, or interrupt, his services (Heb 8:1-4). And seeing as how
Christ rose from the dead immortal (Rom 6:9, Heb 7:3, Rev 1:18) then old
age and death will never be a factor in either the length or the effectiveness
of his priesthood tenure.
†. Heb 7:24-25 . . He, on the other hand, because he abides forever, holds
his priesthood permanently. Hence, also, he is able to save forever those
who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make
intercession for them.
FYI: The order of Melchizedek is a "high priest" order (Heb 5:10, Heb 6:20).
Well; the Bible limits the number of high priests in office at a time to just
one; and the man stays in office till he's dead before being replaced-- which
of course won't happen with Christ seeing as how he rose from the dead
immortal.
Point being: Mormonism's over-crowded order of Melchizedek is unbiblical:
and so, for that matter, is Mormonism's order of Aaron seeing as how his is
the office of a high priest too.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=[/font]
-
WebersHome
- Guru
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:10 am
- Location: Oregon
- Been thanked: 24 times
Post #45
[font=Verdana]-
Hope For Alcoholics And LGBT
Everybody has problems with proclivities; which Webster's defines as
inclinations or predispositions toward something: especially strong inherent
inclinations toward something objectionable.
Everybody also has problems with predilections too; which Webster's defines
as a natural liking for something; viz: a natural tendency to do or to be
attracted to something.
In the passage below; Paul's pronoun "we" included himself as someone with
natural-born longings and desires for bad things.
†. Eph 2:2-4 . .We too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging
the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of
wrath, even as the rest.
Paul's pronoun "all" torpedoes every Christian claiming to be born free of
one or more sinful predilections.
The point is: unless something were done to remedy human nature's sinful
proclivities and predilections, nobody would qualify for citizenship in either
the new cosmos or the holy city depicted in the 21st chapter of Revelation.
Everybody, no exceptions, even Christ's apostles, would be barred entry
even though Christ gave his life as a ransom to rescue their souls from the
wrath of God.
The problem is: forgiveness isn't a cure; viz: forgiven alcoholics and LGBT
go right on as alcoholics and LGBT just like always and were they to attempt
to suppress their desires throughout eternity, I think they would eventually
go mad with a nervous breakdown because they would be fighting against
nature; which everybody instinctively knows is a fight that can't be won
without suffering serious psychological consequences.
So then, it's futile to tell alcoholics and LGBT to stop giving in to their desires
if they want to get to heaven and stay in heaven because that's not a viable,
long-range solution to their problem. The problem is not their conduct; no,
their conduct is merely a symptom; and as every informed person knows:
you don't treat an illness by treating its symptoms-- that method has been
proven ineffective.
God's remedy for alcoholics and LGBT is pretty extreme; but it's the only
way He can get them into heaven so they can stay in heaven.
First off: He doesn't remove their longings and desires; instead God regards
their natural-born condition as so far gone that it can't be treated. In other
words: God throws the baby out with the bath water, so to speak, and starts
from scratch with a new baby.
†. John 3:3 . . I tell you the truth: no one can see the kingdom of God
unless he is born again.
The birth about which Christ spoke isn't an option; no, it's a must.
†. John 3:7 . .You must be born again.
That goes for everybody, not just alcoholics and LGBT, because Christ said
"no one" can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again; which of
course has to include all the holy people in the Old Testament too or
otherwise the words "no one" are just hot air and serve no useful purpose.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=[/font]
Hope For Alcoholics And LGBT
Everybody has problems with proclivities; which Webster's defines as
inclinations or predispositions toward something: especially strong inherent
inclinations toward something objectionable.
Everybody also has problems with predilections too; which Webster's defines
as a natural liking for something; viz: a natural tendency to do or to be
attracted to something.
In the passage below; Paul's pronoun "we" included himself as someone with
natural-born longings and desires for bad things.
†. Eph 2:2-4 . .We too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging
the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of
wrath, even as the rest.
Paul's pronoun "all" torpedoes every Christian claiming to be born free of
one or more sinful predilections.
The point is: unless something were done to remedy human nature's sinful
proclivities and predilections, nobody would qualify for citizenship in either
the new cosmos or the holy city depicted in the 21st chapter of Revelation.
Everybody, no exceptions, even Christ's apostles, would be barred entry
even though Christ gave his life as a ransom to rescue their souls from the
wrath of God.
The problem is: forgiveness isn't a cure; viz: forgiven alcoholics and LGBT
go right on as alcoholics and LGBT just like always and were they to attempt
to suppress their desires throughout eternity, I think they would eventually
go mad with a nervous breakdown because they would be fighting against
nature; which everybody instinctively knows is a fight that can't be won
without suffering serious psychological consequences.
So then, it's futile to tell alcoholics and LGBT to stop giving in to their desires
if they want to get to heaven and stay in heaven because that's not a viable,
long-range solution to their problem. The problem is not their conduct; no,
their conduct is merely a symptom; and as every informed person knows:
you don't treat an illness by treating its symptoms-- that method has been
proven ineffective.
God's remedy for alcoholics and LGBT is pretty extreme; but it's the only
way He can get them into heaven so they can stay in heaven.
First off: He doesn't remove their longings and desires; instead God regards
their natural-born condition as so far gone that it can't be treated. In other
words: God throws the baby out with the bath water, so to speak, and starts
from scratch with a new baby.
†. John 3:3 . . I tell you the truth: no one can see the kingdom of God
unless he is born again.
The birth about which Christ spoke isn't an option; no, it's a must.
†. John 3:7 . .You must be born again.
That goes for everybody, not just alcoholics and LGBT, because Christ said
"no one" can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again; which of
course has to include all the holy people in the Old Testament too or
otherwise the words "no one" are just hot air and serve no useful purpose.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=[/font]
-
WebersHome
- Guru
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:10 am
- Location: Oregon
- Been thanked: 24 times
Post #46
[font=Verdana]-
Savior Defined
†. Matt 8:23-25 . . And when he got into the boat, his disciples followed him.
And behold, there arose a great storm in the sea, so that the boat was
covered with the waves; but he himself was asleep. And they came to him,
and awoke him, saying: Save us, Lord; we are perishing!
The koiné Greek word for "save" in that verse is sozo (sode'-zo) which
means to rescue and/or protect.
†. Luke 2:8-11 . . And in the same region there were some shepherds
staying out in the fields, and keeping watch over their flock by night. And an
angel of the Lord suddenly stood before them, and the glory of the Lord
shone around them; and they were terribly frightened.
. . . And the angel said to them: Do not be afraid; for behold, I bring you
good news of a great joy which shall be for all the people; for today in the
city of David there has been born for you a savior, who is Christ the Lord.
The Greek word for "savior" in that verse is soter (so-tare') which means: a
rescuer.
Rescuers typically help people who are in grave distress and/or imminent
danger of death and/or serious injury, and helpless to do anything about it;
e.g. Red Cross, Firemen, Emergency Medical teams, snow patrols, mountain
units, and the Coast Guard and National Guard.
Wouldn't it be awful if those agencies refused to assist desperate folk until
they first proved themselves deserving? Well lucky for everyone that those
agencies work on the basis of need rather than merit or many of us would
end up thrown back to the wolves.
I think quite a few people are under the impression that Christ as some sort
of parole officer; viz: If parolees "endure to the end" as they say; then he
grants them their walking papers. But God forbid they should violate the
conditions of their parole, because then it's right back to the slammer they
go to finish out their sentences which, according to Rom 6:23, is death.
Probation can be likened to a sword of Damocles hanging over people's
heads by a slender thread easily broken by conduct unbecoming. How dare
the angel of Luke 2:8-11 describe his announcement as "good news of great
joy" if probation were actually what's meant by sozo instead of to rescue
and/or to protect.
On the other hand; if Christ is in the business of rescuing people in
accordance with the humane principles underlying normal emergency
services; then yes, I fully agree with the angel that the birth of Christ is
something to get excited about.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=[/font]
Savior Defined
†. Matt 8:23-25 . . And when he got into the boat, his disciples followed him.
And behold, there arose a great storm in the sea, so that the boat was
covered with the waves; but he himself was asleep. And they came to him,
and awoke him, saying: Save us, Lord; we are perishing!
The koiné Greek word for "save" in that verse is sozo (sode'-zo) which
means to rescue and/or protect.
†. Luke 2:8-11 . . And in the same region there were some shepherds
staying out in the fields, and keeping watch over their flock by night. And an
angel of the Lord suddenly stood before them, and the glory of the Lord
shone around them; and they were terribly frightened.
. . . And the angel said to them: Do not be afraid; for behold, I bring you
good news of a great joy which shall be for all the people; for today in the
city of David there has been born for you a savior, who is Christ the Lord.
The Greek word for "savior" in that verse is soter (so-tare') which means: a
rescuer.
Rescuers typically help people who are in grave distress and/or imminent
danger of death and/or serious injury, and helpless to do anything about it;
e.g. Red Cross, Firemen, Emergency Medical teams, snow patrols, mountain
units, and the Coast Guard and National Guard.
Wouldn't it be awful if those agencies refused to assist desperate folk until
they first proved themselves deserving? Well lucky for everyone that those
agencies work on the basis of need rather than merit or many of us would
end up thrown back to the wolves.
I think quite a few people are under the impression that Christ as some sort
of parole officer; viz: If parolees "endure to the end" as they say; then he
grants them their walking papers. But God forbid they should violate the
conditions of their parole, because then it's right back to the slammer they
go to finish out their sentences which, according to Rom 6:23, is death.
Probation can be likened to a sword of Damocles hanging over people's
heads by a slender thread easily broken by conduct unbecoming. How dare
the angel of Luke 2:8-11 describe his announcement as "good news of great
joy" if probation were actually what's meant by sozo instead of to rescue
and/or to protect.
On the other hand; if Christ is in the business of rescuing people in
accordance with the humane principles underlying normal emergency
services; then yes, I fully agree with the angel that the birth of Christ is
something to get excited about.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=[/font]
-
WebersHome
- Guru
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:10 am
- Location: Oregon
- Been thanked: 24 times
Post #47
[font=Verdana]-
The Fiery Serpent
†. John 3:14-17 . . As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; that whoever believes may in him have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
The incident to which Christ referred is located at Num 21:5-9. Long story short: Yhvh's people became weary of eating manna all the time at every meal. But instead of courteously, and diplomatically, petitioning their divine benefactor for a different diet, they became hostile and confrontational; angrily demanding tastier food.
In response to their insolence, and their ingratitude for His providence; Yhvh sent a swarm of deadly poisonous vipers among them; which began striking people; and every strike was 100% fatal, no exceptions.
After a number of people died, the rest came to their senses and begged Moses to intercede. In reply; The Lord instructed Moses to fashion an image of the vipers and hoist it up on a pole in plain view so that everyone dying from venom could look to the image for relief.
The key issue here is that the image was the only God-given remedy for the people's bites-- not sacrifices and offerings, not tithing, not church attendance, not scapulars, not confession, not holy days of obligation, not the Sabbath, not the golden rule, not charity, not Bible study and/or Sunday school, not self denial, not vows of poverty, not the Ten Commandments, not one's religion of choice, no; not even prayers. The image was it; nothing else would suffice to save their lives.
In other words then: Christ's crucifixion is the only God-given rescue from the wrath of God; and when people accept it, then according to John 3:14-17 and John 5:24, they qualify for a transfer from death into life. Those who reject his crucifixion as the only God-given rescue from the wrath of God are already on the docket to face it.
†. John 3:18 . .Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.
His son's "name" in this case is relative to the fiery serpent incident.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=[/font]
The Fiery Serpent
†. John 3:14-17 . . As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; that whoever believes may in him have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
The incident to which Christ referred is located at Num 21:5-9. Long story short: Yhvh's people became weary of eating manna all the time at every meal. But instead of courteously, and diplomatically, petitioning their divine benefactor for a different diet, they became hostile and confrontational; angrily demanding tastier food.
In response to their insolence, and their ingratitude for His providence; Yhvh sent a swarm of deadly poisonous vipers among them; which began striking people; and every strike was 100% fatal, no exceptions.
After a number of people died, the rest came to their senses and begged Moses to intercede. In reply; The Lord instructed Moses to fashion an image of the vipers and hoist it up on a pole in plain view so that everyone dying from venom could look to the image for relief.
The key issue here is that the image was the only God-given remedy for the people's bites-- not sacrifices and offerings, not tithing, not church attendance, not scapulars, not confession, not holy days of obligation, not the Sabbath, not the golden rule, not charity, not Bible study and/or Sunday school, not self denial, not vows of poverty, not the Ten Commandments, not one's religion of choice, no; not even prayers. The image was it; nothing else would suffice to save their lives.
In other words then: Christ's crucifixion is the only God-given rescue from the wrath of God; and when people accept it, then according to John 3:14-17 and John 5:24, they qualify for a transfer from death into life. Those who reject his crucifixion as the only God-given rescue from the wrath of God are already on the docket to face it.
†. John 3:18 . .Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.
His son's "name" in this case is relative to the fiery serpent incident.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=[/font]
-
WebersHome
- Guru
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:10 am
- Location: Oregon
- Been thanked: 24 times
Post #48
[font=Verdana]-
Why Everyone Has To Die At Least Once
Up until the time of Moses there was only one capital sin on the books— the sin of eating the forbidden fruit (Gen 2:17). Murder as per Gen 9:5-6 isn't a capital sin; it's a capital crime; which is quite a bit different than a capital sin.
The wording of Gen 9:5-6 doesn't prohibit murder. What it does is make humanity responsible to execute its murderers. A divine law actually prohibiting murder would come later in Moses' day. (Ex 20:13)
So then, seeing as how there was only one capital sin on the books— one that is impossible to repeat —why did people have to die prior to Moses?
The answer is: they all had to die because of Adam. His sin was a capital sin that effects his entire posterity: both the good and the bad; the young and the old.
This is really difficult for some people to get their heads around. Nevertheless, it's very important to accept it whether one understands it or not because Paul applies this principle in his effort to explain why it is that believers never have to worry about being condemned for their sins. (Rom 5:12-21)[/font]
[font=Georgia]NOTE[/font][font=Verdana]: Opponents are often quick to point out that Ezek 18:20 says that children don't share their father's guilt. But hey, which came first? Adam or Ezekiel? So then, since Adam came along many years before Ezekiel, then God was at liberty to reckon Adam's posterity his willing accomplices.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=[/font]
Why Everyone Has To Die At Least Once
Up until the time of Moses there was only one capital sin on the books— the sin of eating the forbidden fruit (Gen 2:17). Murder as per Gen 9:5-6 isn't a capital sin; it's a capital crime; which is quite a bit different than a capital sin.
The wording of Gen 9:5-6 doesn't prohibit murder. What it does is make humanity responsible to execute its murderers. A divine law actually prohibiting murder would come later in Moses' day. (Ex 20:13)
So then, seeing as how there was only one capital sin on the books— one that is impossible to repeat —why did people have to die prior to Moses?
The answer is: they all had to die because of Adam. His sin was a capital sin that effects his entire posterity: both the good and the bad; the young and the old.
This is really difficult for some people to get their heads around. Nevertheless, it's very important to accept it whether one understands it or not because Paul applies this principle in his effort to explain why it is that believers never have to worry about being condemned for their sins. (Rom 5:12-21)[/font]
[font=Georgia]NOTE[/font][font=Verdana]: Opponents are often quick to point out that Ezek 18:20 says that children don't share their father's guilt. But hey, which came first? Adam or Ezekiel? So then, since Adam came along many years before Ezekiel, then God was at liberty to reckon Adam's posterity his willing accomplices.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=[/font]
-
WebersHome
- Guru
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:10 am
- Location: Oregon
- Been thanked: 24 times
Post #49
[font=Verdana]-
Post #47 is a pretty good way to explain universal death, but it isn't the only way, nor even the best way. Here's another option.
Prior to Moses, an official code of law with the power to condemn the entire human race to death at once did not exist.
†. Rom 3:19-20 . . Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin.
†. Rom 5:13-14 . . Before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law. Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam.
The answer is: they all had to die because of Adam. His sin effected his entire posterity: both the good and the bad; the young and the old.
This is really difficult for some people to get their heads around. Nevertheless, it's very important to accept it whether one understands it or not because Paul applies this principle in his effort to explain why it is that believers never have to worry about being condemned for their sins. (Rom 5:12-21)[/font]
[font=Georgia]NOTE[/font][font=Verdana]: Opponents are often quick to point out that Ezek 18:20 says that children don't share their father's guilt. But hey, which came first? Adam or Ezekiel? So then, since Adam's incident came along many years before Ezekiel's prophecy, then God was at liberty back then to reckon Adam's posterity his willing accomplices.
†. Rom 5:12 . . Sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin; and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=[/font]
Post #47 is a pretty good way to explain universal death, but it isn't the only way, nor even the best way. Here's another option.
Prior to Moses, an official code of law with the power to condemn the entire human race to death at once did not exist.
†. Rom 3:19-20 . . Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin.
†. Rom 5:13-14 . . Before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law. Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam.
The answer is: they all had to die because of Adam. His sin effected his entire posterity: both the good and the bad; the young and the old.
This is really difficult for some people to get their heads around. Nevertheless, it's very important to accept it whether one understands it or not because Paul applies this principle in his effort to explain why it is that believers never have to worry about being condemned for their sins. (Rom 5:12-21)[/font]
[font=Georgia]NOTE[/font][font=Verdana]: Opponents are often quick to point out that Ezek 18:20 says that children don't share their father's guilt. But hey, which came first? Adam or Ezekiel? So then, since Adam's incident came along many years before Ezekiel's prophecy, then God was at liberty back then to reckon Adam's posterity his willing accomplices.
†. Rom 5:12 . . Sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin; and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=[/font]
-
WebersHome
- Guru
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:10 am
- Location: Oregon
- Been thanked: 24 times
Re: What I Think
Post #50[font=Verdana]-
Leaven
â—� Gen 19:3 . . Lot prepared a feast for them and baked unleavened bread, and they ate.
The Hebrew word for "unleavened" is matstsah (mats-tsaw') which essentially refers to an unfermented cake or loaf; in other words: bread made with sweet dough rather than sour dough.
In this day and age of cultured yeast it's not easy to explain what the Bible means by leavened and unleavened. Well; the primary difference between the two terms isn't ingredients; rather, the primary difference is age; for example:
"Let us therefore celebrate the feast, not with old leaven" (1Cor 5:8)
If there is an old leaven, then there must be a new leaven; just as there is an old wine and a new wine.
Old leaven can refer to a batch of dough that's going bad, i.e. fermenting; which, given time, dough will do on its own without the addition of yeast because all flour, no matter how carefully it's milled and packaged, contains a percentage of naturally-occurring fungi. New leaven, then, would refer to a time in the life of the dough before the flour's naturally-occurring fungi has time to spoil the product; for example:
â—� Ex 12:34 . . So the people took their dough before it was leavened, with their kneading bowls bound up in the clothes on their shoulders.
That gives an idea of how quickly God moved the people out of Egypt after slaying all the firstborn. They had made bread with unfermented dough for that night's meal in accord with the law of the Passover instituted in the 12th chapter of Exodus.
Anyway, point being; Lot served his guests fresh bread made with fresh dough rather than with bread made with dough that's been sitting around for a while. Bread made with sour dough is reasonably safe to eat, we know that, so serving his guests bread made with aged dough wouldn't have been a health issue. I like to think that Lot served his honored guests unleavened bread as an act of courtesy rather than necessity. Giving people your best, rather than your less than best, shows that you think highly of them.
/[/font]
Leaven
â—� Gen 19:3 . . Lot prepared a feast for them and baked unleavened bread, and they ate.
The Hebrew word for "unleavened" is matstsah (mats-tsaw') which essentially refers to an unfermented cake or loaf; in other words: bread made with sweet dough rather than sour dough.
In this day and age of cultured yeast it's not easy to explain what the Bible means by leavened and unleavened. Well; the primary difference between the two terms isn't ingredients; rather, the primary difference is age; for example:
"Let us therefore celebrate the feast, not with old leaven" (1Cor 5:8)
If there is an old leaven, then there must be a new leaven; just as there is an old wine and a new wine.
Old leaven can refer to a batch of dough that's going bad, i.e. fermenting; which, given time, dough will do on its own without the addition of yeast because all flour, no matter how carefully it's milled and packaged, contains a percentage of naturally-occurring fungi. New leaven, then, would refer to a time in the life of the dough before the flour's naturally-occurring fungi has time to spoil the product; for example:
â—� Ex 12:34 . . So the people took their dough before it was leavened, with their kneading bowls bound up in the clothes on their shoulders.
That gives an idea of how quickly God moved the people out of Egypt after slaying all the firstborn. They had made bread with unfermented dough for that night's meal in accord with the law of the Passover instituted in the 12th chapter of Exodus.
Anyway, point being; Lot served his guests fresh bread made with fresh dough rather than with bread made with dough that's been sitting around for a while. Bread made with sour dough is reasonably safe to eat, we know that, so serving his guests bread made with aged dough wouldn't have been a health issue. I like to think that Lot served his honored guests unleavened bread as an act of courtesy rather than necessity. Giving people your best, rather than your less than best, shows that you think highly of them.
/[/font]
