logo
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline Matthew  
#1 Posted : Wednesday, August 25, 2010 4:44:28 PM(UTC)
Matthew
Joined: 10/3/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,191
Man
Location: São Paulo, Brazil

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
My bathroom has developed some mildew (mold) on the roof because of the moisture from four of us having showers every day, and I plan to give it a good cleaning tomorrow. Leviticus 14 came to mind, and I was struck by this passage: 33-35 Yahweh said to Moses and Aaron, "When you enter the land of Canaan, which I am giving you as your possession, and I put a spreading mildew in a house in that land, the owner of the house must go and tell the priest, 'I have seen something that looks like mildew in my house.'" It seems that I'm off the hook from having to go find a priest to inspect my roof since I don't live in the land. This passage could literally open up a debate regarding the "picking and choosing" of which Torah laws are to be carried out literally and which are not. Just thought it was quite interesting and would post it.
Offline MadDog  
#2 Posted : Wednesday, August 25, 2010 9:40:31 PM(UTC)
MadDog
Joined: 6/19/2009(UTC)
Posts: 588
Man
Location: San Antonio, Texas

Was thanked: 19 time(s) in 13 post(s)
I can't see Yahweh going out of his way to send a Priest to inspect a house for plain mildew. The KJV says "leprosy" and "plague," now that's something worth inspecting for. I think Ken Powers "The Owners Manuel" covers laws, commandents, rules, mitzvots pretty well. Also Ken has opened up my eyes about the metaphors and symbolism. From reading The Owners Manuel I now see from your verse, a House (your body / Israel / Temple / Set-Apart, etc.), A Priest (Yahsua / Messiyah / A Redemmer, etc.). In other words the owner goes to the priest to claim that his body is unclean and the Priest actually enters the owners house (body) and makes it clean. Later the Priest orders the house to be cleaned if this or that method fails including purifiying some of the bricks and if they that aren't purified the bricks are removed and replaced . The verses around 33-35 are rich in symbolism.

Also the verses before and after speak about leprosy. As far as the mildew in your bathroom, I'd get some detergent and just scrape it off just like you said, but if your body starts falling apart literally, I'd go to a Doctor and not a Priest.
Offline Matthew  
#3 Posted : Thursday, August 26, 2010 12:37:54 AM(UTC)
Matthew
Joined: 10/3/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,191
Man
Location: São Paulo, Brazil

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Ahhh, thanks MD, my NIV (well online version) is quite misleading. Should've double-checked which word was originally used and its meaning. But what I found interesting was it only being done in the land, i.e. Israel, where a priest was present. It seems as if some laws can only be performed by those living within the Land and not the nations surrounding it.

For interest sake, here's KP's take on the passage:

Quote:
(568) A leprous house defiles. “When you have come into the land of Canaan, which I give you as a possession, and I put the leprous plague in a house in the land of your possession, and he who owns the house comes and tells the priest, saying, ‘It seems to me that there is some plague in the house,’ then the priest shall command that they empty the house, before the priest goes into it to examine the plague, that all that is in the house may not be made unclean; and afterward the priest shall go in to examine the house.” (Leviticus 14:34-36) We’ve moved from skin afflictions and apparel infections to “sick building syndrome,” yet another metaphor for spiritual sickness. For convenience, we’re calling all of this stuff “leprosy,” though there’s obviously a lot more than one physical malady in view. Here we see a new wrinkle: Yahweh Himself is said to be afflicting the house with the leprous plague, and the homeowner is expected to notice it and report it to the priest. This may seem odd, until we factor in Proverbs 3:33. “The curse of Yahweh is on the house of the wicked, but He blesses the home of the just.” Obviously, a “house” here is a symbol for something larger—where we live, expressed in broad strokes, our whole socieo-economic-religio-political world.

Following the symbols to their logical conclusion, we see that the believer is to be cognizant of his surroundings, the society in which he lives. If he sees “a plague in the house,” (and who could miss the signs of spiritual disease in our world today?) he is to report it to the priest. That’s a picture of prayer, for the priest was the divinely appointed link between God and Man. The priest (and remember, our High Priest is Yahshua) first “empties the house,” that is, he takes out those within it who remain undefiled. Interestingly, he does this before the stones of the house are subjected to examination, to testing or trial. Could this be another subtle indicator of a pre-tribulation rapture? I believe it is. On reflection, it seems this whole passage is eschatological in nature (not that I was sharp enough to catch it when I wrote Future History).

Note that the occupant is not to (1) tear down the house himself, (2) ignore the problem, (3) become tolerant of it, or (4) defer to the opinion of his neighbors or the government—human wisdom, such as it is. No, he is to go to the priest—that is, to Yahshua. But wait—we’ve already established that the plague is Yahweh’s doing, sent in response to our society’s wickedness. Are we supposed to appeal to the One who sent the disease in order to be kept out of it? Yes, we are. See Revelation 3:10 if you don’t believe me.

The continuing instructions explain (sort of). “And he shall examine the plague; and indeed if the plague is on the walls of the house with ingrained streaks, greenish or reddish [the colors of Islam and Communism—a coincidence?], which appear to be deep in the wall, then the priest shall go out of the house, to the door of the house, and shut up the house seven days.” Is what seems like a problem really a problem? Only time will tell. The “seven days,” while generally metaphorical of God’s perfect timing, might possibly indicate the seven years of trial the earth will experience after the godly inhabitants have departed—a time known as the Tribulation. Note that during this time, the Priest (symbolic of Yahshua) is “out of the house,” a condition that cannot come to pass as long as His people still inhabit the planet. As we saw before, isolation, separation, holiness, is part of the formula. The godly inhabitants of the “house” are not to be exposed to the potential threat while its true nature is yet fully undetermined. They are to be set apart from the world.

“And the priest [ultimately, Yahshua] shall come again on the seventh day [yeah, I read about that somewhere: it’s the ultimate Sabbath—the Millennial reign of Christ] and look; and indeed if the plague has spread on the walls of the house, then the priest shall command that they take away the stones in which is the plague, and they shall cast them into an unclean place outside the city. And he shall cause the house to be scraped inside, all around, and the dust that they scrape off they shall pour out in an unclean place outside the city. Then they shall take other stones and put them in the place of those stones, and he shall take other mortar and plaster the house.” (Leviticus 14:37-42) Here’s the bottom line. If an idea is truly toxic, the Priest (Yahshua) will, after giving it time to show its true colors, remove its presence and consign it to an “unclean place outside the city” (for its practitioners, metaphorical of hell). Thus doctrines like Ba’al worship, rabbinic Judaism, apostate “Christianity,” Islam, and atheistic secular humanism will all appear in turn, poison their respective societies, and be removed from the house on the “seventh day,” unceremoniously scraped off and hauled away. But Yahweh doesn’t intend to leave gaping holes in the house of human society. “Other stones”—true believers, even if they weren’t originally part of the wall’s construction—will be brought in as replacements: it’s the Church of Repentant Laodicea. And the “plaster?” I believe this white, opaque coating is analogous to the garments of light God’s children will wear in His Kingdom—imputed righteousness.

(649) The priest shall re-examine a previously infected house for signs of “leprosy.” “Now if the plague comes back and breaks out in the house, after he has taken away the stones, after he has scraped the house, and after it is plastered, then the priest shall come and look; and indeed if the plague has spread in the house, it is an active leprosy in the house. It is unclean.” (Leviticus 14:43-44) In Mitzvah #568, we looked at the procedure for examining “leprosy” (indicative of a spiritual plague) in a house, which is metaphorical of human society—the place we mortals live. There we learned that the whole “leprosy in the house” thing is a prophecy—that Yahweh will remove the offensive elements of our society during the “seventh day,” that is the Millennial kingdom of Yahshua. Here we have the sequel: what happens if the plague comes back after Yahweh has purged the house of evil?

“And he [the priest, symbolic of Yahshua] shall break down the house, its stones, its timber, and all the plaster of the house, and he shall carry them outside the city to an unclean place. Moreover he who goes into the house at all while it is shut up shall be unclean until evening. And he who lies down in the house shall wash his clothes, and he who eats in the house shall wash his clothes....” What? During the Millennium, the perfect reign of the Messiah? Yes, I’m afraid so. There will still be mortals upon the earth during that time, descendants of Adam and Eve, with the same sin nature. These, the offspring of the blessed “sheep” spoken of in Matthew 25:31-46, will still be faced with the same choice all of us have: to reciprocate God’s love or rebel against Him. Sadly, Revelation 20:7-9 reports that at the end of the Millennium, multitudes of mortals will follow the recently paroled Satan in rebellion against King Yahshua. And at that point, the King will have no recourse but to “break down the house, its stones, its timber, and all the plaster of the house, and carry them outside the city to an unclean place.” That’s the lake of fire, unless I miss my guess.

But at least this time, not the entire world will rebel. “But if the priest comes in and examines it, and indeed the plague has not spread in the house after the house was plastered, then the priest shall pronounce the house clean, because the plague is healed. And he shall take, to cleanse the house, two birds, cedar wood, scarlet, and hyssop. Then he shall kill one of the birds in an earthen vessel over running water; and he shall take the cedar wood, the hyssop, the scarlet, and the living bird, and dip them in the blood of the slain bird and in the running water, and sprinkle the house seven times. And he shall cleanse the house with the blood of the bird and the running water and the living bird, with the cedar wood, the hyssop, and the scarlet. Then he shall let the living bird loose outside the city in the open field, and make atonement for the house, and it shall be clean.” (Leviticus 14:45-53) Those Millennial mortals who do not rebel will still need healing, cleansing, and atonement for their sins and trespasses, just as we do today. They, like us, must be cleansed of the world’s filth before they can assume their transformed immortal bodies—bodies that will endure in Yahshua’s presence for eternity. We mortals all become defiled just by walking through the earth—the “leprous house” in the present scriptural metaphor. The prescription for “pronouncing the house clean” is a reprise of passage we discussed in detail under Mitzvah #578, so I won’t go over it again here.
Offline Quester  
#4 Posted : Tuesday, September 21, 2010 9:03:15 AM(UTC)
Quester
Joined: 9/14/2010(UTC)
Posts: 70
Man
Location: Bonn, Germany

MadDog wrote:
I think Ken Powers "The Owners Manuel" covers laws, commandents, rules, mitzvots pretty well. Also Ken has opened up my eyes about the metaphors and symbolism. From reading The Owners Manuel I now see from your verse, a House (your body / Israel / Temple / Set-Apart, etc.), A Priest (Yahsua / Messiyah / A Redemmer, etc.). In other words the owner goes to the priest to claim that his body is unclean and the Priest actually enters the owners house (body) and makes it clean. Later the Priest orders the house to be cleaned if this or that method fails including purifiying some of the bricks and if they that aren't purified the bricks are removed and replaced . The verses around 33-35 are rich in symbolism.


Hi MadDog and Matthew (and anyone else who may read or respond),

I haven't read "The Owner's Manual" yet, but I have downloaded it. So I'm only going off what little MadDog wrote above, and the large excerpt from it that was posted by Matthew.

This past year, I've been thinking about the relevance of the Mosaic Law to modern (post-"Messiah") life, and have been trying to understand things more thoroughly than I have before.

As I was reading this thread, one particular "Messiah" quote (in Matthew 5) came to mind: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."

Normally, this passage is either ignored as having no relevance (like most "christians" do), or is interpreted as being good evidence that we are still supposed to follow the Law (in a "letter of the law" sort of way). I've never really thoroughly considered this third possibility (which I will describe below), but I can say that it has occurred to me before, and I've had sort of a nagging feeling that such a third possibility might just be the right way to understand it...

I'm not sure how good a translation that is, but a few things really stand out to me (from the Matthew 5 quote):

(1) abolish vs. fulfill
(2) none of the Law will disappear until everything is accomplished.

Since I see abolish and disappear as kinda-somewhat-similar concepts (at least in English), and fulfill and accomplish as even-more-similar concepts, it makes me think:

(1) that maybe what he was saying, was that he wasn't going to "completely throw out" the law and prophets, as perhaps some were expecting (or hoping) -- in other words, he was going to do something much deeper than that: fulfill them.

(2) that maybe he was also saying that the Law won't have "run its course," until everything in it is accomplished.

(3) in which case he wasn't talking about simply following the rules, like a police officer would. He was maybe talking about a kind of deeper "spiritual" fulfillment that went far beyond anyone's expectations (or hopes).

I'm guessing from the "Owner's Manual" excerpt, that this third possibility is what the author would promote, and what you guys are talking about. If the Law is more about metaphor and symbolism than "the letter of the law," then that would be amazing and VERY DEEP. Which would be in-line with the other "Messiah" quotes we have in the Gospels (amazing and deep).

Such a "deep" interpretation of the Law would reduce the need to "pick and choose."

Like so many others, as a "Gentile," I'm a little confused about what application the Mosaic Law (that was given to another people group, as a covenant with them, not me -- I never signed up for that covenant, and my forefathers weren't among those who agreed to it!!) -- what application it has to me personally.

And, of course, I'm also a little confused about how laws relating to sacrifices, a priesthood and a temple can possibly apply (to me or anyone else) today, when there's presently no functioning priesthood or temple. Matthew's comment about not "living in the land" also makes me wonder.

Add to all of that the apparent decision by the apostles (in Acts 15): "...that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood." and it makes me wonder even more...

(Yes, I've heard the argument that in the above Acts 15 passage, the following verse renders this short-list of 4 things just a starting point, and that therefore the "Gentiles" were expected to learn and follow all of the Law, not just the short-list of 4 things -- but that the burden for sharing all that other, more detailed information with them would have to be carried by the local synagogues -- and that the apostles, then, didn't need to spend any more of their valuable time writing about it...)

So, if there's a more "correct" way to interpret all of this -- other than ignoring it (like most "christians" do) or trying to follow the Mosaic Law (in a strict "letter of the law" sort of way) -- then I'm open to considering it!!

Thoughts?

Q
Users browsing this topic
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.