In these verses God is telling Moses to tell Aaron that any one with a defect may not offer the food of his God. So basically he is saying anyone with a deformity is not worthy of being in God's presence right? Thats kind of lame.
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Leviticus 21: 16-21
- Thread starter Eishiba
- Start date
motherprayer
Elisha
Interesting. In verse 22 it says "He shall eat the bread of his God, both of the most holy, and of the holy."
This could be God's way of saying that those with disabilities are not required to work, but that they may eat without working because of their limitations.
Thoughts?
This could be God's way of saying that those with disabilities are not required to work, but that they may eat without working because of their limitations.
Thoughts?
Upvote
0
Look Up
"What is unseen is eternal"
The regulation cited referred only to the priestly descendants of Aaron the high priest as the text makes clear. Much of the priestly code, while not entirely understood today, seems to be focused on ceremonial and ritual purity as if concrete object lessons were in view. And that seems to be the way the New Testament looks at it from the vantage point of Christ's priesthood.
Perhaps a contemporary parallel might be a company producing health or beauty products picking out human models to represent it. Most marketers and CEOs would probably not prefer physically ugly models. Granted also, when a company puts its best foot forward, the act may imply things about the company one would not want to say of a holy God, so the parallel is not perfect. In any case, reverence for and fear of God were primary in worship.
The priests were to represent the people before God. God was to be shown the utmost respect. The absence of physical defects on the bodies of the priests may have encouraged the people in reverence for God. Blemishes implied not giving one's best to God.
But to characterize the Mosaic regulations in question as lame (assuming no pun intended, by the way) implies that in the New Testament, Jesus' respect and high regard for the Mosaic law (or God's law) is also "lame." Who then was Jesus?
Perhaps a contemporary parallel might be a company producing health or beauty products picking out human models to represent it. Most marketers and CEOs would probably not prefer physically ugly models. Granted also, when a company puts its best foot forward, the act may imply things about the company one would not want to say of a holy God, so the parallel is not perfect. In any case, reverence for and fear of God were primary in worship.
The priests were to represent the people before God. God was to be shown the utmost respect. The absence of physical defects on the bodies of the priests may have encouraged the people in reverence for God. Blemishes implied not giving one's best to God.
But to characterize the Mosaic regulations in question as lame (assuming no pun intended, by the way) implies that in the New Testament, Jesus' respect and high regard for the Mosaic law (or God's law) is also "lame." Who then was Jesus?
Upvote
0
J
jdbear
Guest
Aren't blemishes and deformities symbolic of spiritual imperfections? Maybe the OT is teaching us that the true Priest (Jesus) would be perfection!
Upvote
0
Steve Petersen
Senior Veteran
The tabernacle is a picture of the world to come, the lost Eden. Cherubs guarded the way into the Garden and into the Holy of Holies.
The restriction is a teaching: there will be none of these diseases in the world to come (because God will heal all of them as promised in the prophets.) It is not meant as a snub to the handicapped but as a hope of perfection and healing.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Alright I understand. I should have just named this thread, "Eishiba's scripture questions". In Mark 16:18 it says the people who believe will do things like heal and cast out demons and then it says when they drink deadly poison it will not hurt them. Wait what? So if I believe then I can go drink a bottle of 409 and not hurt me?
I'm gonna add another one. In Leviticus 11:20 he talks about not eating four legged winged insects. Wait what? Grasshoppers...roaches...locusts...all have six legs. Whats this about?
I'm gonna add another one. In Leviticus 11:20 he talks about not eating four legged winged insects. Wait what? Grasshoppers...roaches...locusts...all have six legs. Whats this about?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Look Up
"What is unseen is eternal"
Textual support for the end of Mark (including 16:18) is notoriously debatable, and what may have been signs given to apostles and associated Christians of their generation to confirm the gospel may not have been given to the rest of us. "Thou shalt not put the Lord thy God to the test" must also be considered in principle.
... But more to the point and of prior significance, I think, is my previous question to you which as of this writing you have yet to address on this thread.
Upvote
0
Absolutely not.
What you miss is this is the Aaronic Priesthood, which is figurative of our High Priest the Lord Jesus who is perfect. That's why this is.
Consider that the one with a deformity is allowed to eats of the offerings but not allowed to "offer" those offerings:
No man among the descendants of Aaron the priest who has a defect is to come near to offer the Lords offerings by fire; since he has a defect, he shall not come near to offer the food of his God.
22 He may eat the food of his God, both of the most holy and of the holy,
23 only he shall not go in to the veil or come near the altar because he has a defect, so that he will not profane My sanctuaries. For I am the Lord who sanctifies them.
24 So Moses spoke to Aaron and to his sons and to all the sons of Israel.
Consider Hebrews 9:11, 12:
11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation;
12 and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.
The Aaronic Priesthood was representative of Christ. They approached God with the offerings of the people, which typified The Lord Jesus, our High Priest.
Upvote
0
ptomwebster
Senior Member
- Jul 10, 2011
- 1,484
- 45
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
You need to read and "rightly divide" the text before asking questions. Mark 16 is talking about a particular time period not about right now, and He is talking to a certain group of His people, not everyone.
Lev 11:20 "All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination unto you."
What is a bat? Do YOU eat them?
Upvote
0
No it is just a bunch of questions about different verses in the Bible. I'm not that smart so I am asking questions from people smarter than myself.
What version of the Bible are you using? I have NIV and it says, Lev 11:20 "All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you."
A bat would not be included in this because a bat is not a flying insect.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
ViaCrucis
Confessional Lutheran
- Oct 2, 2011
- 40,106
- 29,869
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Lutheran
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- US-Others
A bat, however, is a flying thing. The Hebrew word (עוֹף
means, "a winged thing", based on the root verb (עוּף "to fly". That's the word used in Leviticus 11:20. The NIV's word choice is unfortunate.Bronze age peoples didn't have the benefit of modern cladistics (the science of categorizing organisms), it was sufficient to describe something based on basic observation. Some things had wings and could fly, one kind of these things when landing on the ground walked on all fours--a bat--this was regarded as unclean and not to be eaten by the Jewish people.
-CryptoLutheran
Upvote
0
ptomwebster
Senior Member
- Jul 10, 2011
- 1,484
- 45
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
A bat, however, is a flying thing. The Hebrew word (עוֹף
Bronze age peoples didn't have the benefit of modern cladistics (the science of categorizing organisms), it was sufficient to describe something based on basic observation. Some things had wings and could fly, one kind of these things when landing on the ground walked on all fours--a bat--this was regarded as unclean and not to be eaten by the Jewish people.
-CryptoLutheran
Correct VC!
Upvote
0
Similar threads
