Bible Study The hijacking of the Faith

[About the Son of God]

Leaven is corruption, or the decay, of the bread flour; it is a consumer of the bread; and in the sense that something gets destroyed, it may always be understood to be negative. But then, so would a shepherd be that occasionally eats a sheep -- for the sheep dies, yet, that's exactly what passover prescribes every year. Just so -- There are many events that make use of something which has a negative meaning or aspect, but which when done at a proper time or place or in a limited way, ends up being valuable, good, or at very least - necessary.

Leaven has this problematic characteristic: If leaven is allowed to work too long on bread, it rots. That's the nature of leavening.
A fresh lump of flour with no leaven in it, never rots; but then, it's not very tasty either.
So when it comes to necessity, or preference, I would think unleavened is necessary; leavening is a merely a preference, and a risky proposition which can pay off with pleasant results but not always. Especially in a time and place where bacteria were not understood, and many things were only learned by trial and error, and lots of error.

Some kinds of leavening, molds, etc. are always unsafe to eat, for example certain types of molds in rye are downright lethal if eaten. (LSD is made from one such toxic mold) -- but in other circumstances, the molds are edible; such as in bleu cheese.

What can't be escaped is that when leavening bread, if allowed to go too long, it will eventually rot. In general, leavening is spoken of in a negative light in scripture with only a few positive remarks about it -- and the only NT passage (two copies of the same saying in Matthew and Luke) where it might be seen as positive; there is a distinct ambiguity.

For -- It is not the king, or God, or Jesus, who places the leaven in the flour, but the woman. And she does not just 'mix' it, homogenizing it, rather -- she 'hides' it (encrypts/buries) -- for 'three' measures; It reminds me of the parable/vision of the baker in Genesis, where three and food meant days, and judgment; and that in turn leads me immediately to Jesus' own death in the grave, and journeying among those in prison who's bodies had already corrupted.

1Peter 3:18-19 and
http://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/13-33.htm
vs.
Genesis 40:16-18

So that even in Matthew 13:33, Jesus chose words which do not automatically praise leavening but could be interpreted in many different ways that entail risks. eg: One has to decide what it is, exactly, that the signs correspond to before the parable can be interpreted.

There is nothing which guarantees leavening is going to have a positive outcome, though sometimes it does.

In the OT, there are examples of baked bread that were leavened; that were acceptable as part of a first fruits offering; eg: Leviticus 7:13 but for almost all sacrifices, leavening was strictly forbidden. See the list of quotes I already posted, as CFNET will automatically bring them up if your mouse-over them.

So, when talking about the church -- leavening is a risk, a work of artisanship that can fail; and leavening is not always going to be appropriate. It can mean that corruption will be part of church Growth, for example Jesus also teaches that the devil has planted weeds so that the wheat and tares used to make bread must grow up "together" -- Therefore Christs parables aren't always a "rosy" grace solves all problems... rather Jesus' parables are realistic, sometimes focusing on one detail or another.

There is no guarantee that leavening will produce consistent, positive results as the leaven itself is in a constant battle between good elements and bad ones, that are carried on the whims of the air -- both figuratively, and scientifically understood.

That's why I have no problem with JohnD's thought that the church has been 'infiltrated' when reading Matthew 13:33; for it certainly has.

 

[ezrider]

Leaven is neither negative nor positive in and of itself. Leaven is the agent acts upon the lump to cause what exists within the lump to grow.
In the negative sense there is the doctrine of the Pharisees, which was the Law of Moses. The Law of Moses being the leaven, or the Agent that causes the sin that has existed within this lump of flesh since the fall of man to magnify and grow. The law is not evil, nor is it negative, but the law working in the flesh does cause the sin in us to be magnified and grow.

BUT; that is not the leaven that Jesus is speaking of in the Parable of the Kingdom. In that parable the leaven is certainly not applied in a negative sense, for the leaven of the Kingdom of Christ is Grace, and that leaven works with the seed of the Spirit that has been planted in our hearts, and the work of the leaven of Grace is to cause the Spirit of Christ to grow within our hearts that the righteousness of Christ might be magnified and made known within our flesh. But, as the parable of the sower informs us, only the seed that falls onto the fertile soil takes root and grows, the rest wither away and die.

Clean out the old leaven of the law so that it can't work upon the sin in your flesh, so the the new leaven of Grace can work upon the Spirit.

 

[About the Son of God]

Hi EzRider,

Jesus' parables, whenever he describes them, always have all elements explained as being various kinds of people and messages.

So; in Matthew 13:33, you've only described 1 element, the "leaven"; and said it is "grace", and overlooked the rest of the parable's elements.

In my thinking, Grace never rots, even after a long time or misapplication; so I'm not sure that's a very realistic fit based on what I know leaven does in reality, in a normal kitchen, etc.

If I try to set my doubts aside for a moment, I am struck with another question; how can you possibly consistently explain the rest of the parables elements?

Who, for example, is the 'woman' -- that has 'grace' -- that can plant it in some kind of 'flour' 3x over?

Can you describe the 'woman', and who or what the 'flour' is ? and explain why it's a woman, and not an angel or Jesus, or his Father doing the innoculation ? eg: to whom does the grace belong, and what is 'she' doing with it !?

John was mentioning Catholics in the OP, and I think they would knee jerk associate the word woman with 'Mary'... Which is not something most other denominations would agree with. So, it's not a doctrine that would successfully leaven the 'whole' loaf, so to speak ; but the fact that someone might try such an interpretation would definitely fit JohnD's OP's comment that the church has been 'infiltrated'...

Not that I'm accusing you or anything... it's just, well, strange that you would pick that word 'grace' and arbitrarily assign it to 'leaven' in a heated context like this....

The reason I mention it, is that "Mary" is said in scripture (Greek) to be full of "grace" AKA "favor" (perfect relationship with God κε-χαριτω-μεν-η); Luke 1:28 -- and so you're sort of setting up the parable to fall right in line with common Catholic interpretation; which pretty much is not something that I think JohnD would care for. But who knows? Maybe JohnD will surpirse me...!

 

[Malachi]

And I must say, Reba, you've done an extraordinary job of derailing this thread on a minor point.

Thus leaven has shown its ability to hijack a thread, and hijacking is never positive.

Back to the topic. The corruption of truth began very shortly after creation. Both the Serpent and Eve corrupted God's truth, while Adam stood by silently. Then the evil angels came down to earth and corrupted mankind, and about 4,000 years later we see the corruption of the local assemblies with false doctrines and practices in Revelation 2 and 3. In between Israel abandoned God's truth and went after the traditions of men, and committed the heinous crime of having their own Messiah nailed to a Cross.

Then we see how Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism corrupted the truth by elevating Tradition over Scripture. The Reformation could have brought Christianity back to a purely biblical basis, but the Reformers could not fully jettison the baggage of the RCC. They even persecuted and killed those who rejected infant baptism. The 19th century brought about the corruption of the seminaries and Bible schools with Theological Liberalism. Today we have the Emergent Church Movement corrupting Christianity in a variety of ways.

All of this would be thoroughly discouraging but for fact that the true Word of God could not be utterly corrupted, despite all the malice and hatred of Satan. The traditional Hebrew Masoretic Text and the traditional Byzantine Greek Text prevailed for over 1,900 years, and even today, with all the corrupted modern translations, the Authorized Version (the KJB) holds its own (the only English translation which is based on the traditional texts). And God always has a faithful believing remnant on this earth.

Christians should face the cold hard reality that Bible Christianity will never be popular, the KJB will be despised by the majority (it was burned by the Catholics), and Christians will always be hated, and even persecuted by their own brethren for holding fast to the truth. The Lord gave us ample warning (Mt 24:9-14). But there are many precious promises to the "overcomers", and the Lord Jesus Christ is seated on His throne, waiting for the appropriate time when His enemies will become His footstool (Heb 1:13).

 

[JLB]

Leaven is corruption, or the decay, of the bread flour; it is a consumer of the bread; and in the sense that something gets destroyed, it may always be understood to be negative. But then, so would a shepherd be that occasionally eats a sheep -- for the sheep dies, yet, that's exactly what passover prescribes every year. Just so -- There are many events that make use of something which has a negative meaning or aspect, but which when done at a proper time or place or in a limited way, ends up being valuable, good, or at very least - necessary.

Leaven has this problematic characteristic: If leaven is allowed to work too long on bread, it rots. That's the nature of leavening.
A fresh lump of flour with no leaven in it, never rots; but then, it's not very tasty either.
So when it comes to necessity, or preference, I would think unleavened is necessary; leavening is a merely a preference, and a risky proposition which can pay off with pleasant results but not always. Especially in a time and place where bacteria were not understood, and many things were only learned by trial and error, and lots of error.

Some kinds of leavening, molds, etc. are always unsafe to eat, for example certain types of molds in rye are downright lethal if eaten. (LSD is made from one such toxic mold) -- but in other circumstances, the molds are edible; such as in bleu cheese.

What can't be escaped is that when leavening bread, if allowed to go too long, it will eventually rot. In general, leavening is spoken of in a negative light in scripture with only a few positive remarks about it -- and the only NT passage (two copies of the same saying in Matthew and Luke) where it might be seen as positive; there is a distinct ambiguity.

For -- It is not the king, or God, or Jesus, who places the leaven in the flour, but the woman. And she does not just 'mix' it, homogenizing it, rather -- she 'hides' it (encrypts/buries) -- for 'three' measures; It reminds me of the parable/vision of the baker in Genesis, where three and food meant days, and judgment; and that in turn leads me immediately to Jesus' own death in the grave, and journeying among those in prison who's bodies had already corrupted.

1Peter 3:18-19 and
http://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/13-33.htm
vs.
Genesis 40:16-18

So that even in Matthew 13:33, Jesus chose words which do not automatically praise leavening but could be interpreted in many different ways that entail risks. eg: One has to decide what it is, exactly, that the signs correspond to before the parable can be interpreted.

There is nothing which guarantees leavening is going to have a positive outcome, though sometimes it does.

In the OT, there are examples of baked bread that were leavened; that were acceptable as part of a first fruits offering; eg: Leviticus 7:13 but for almost all sacrifices, leavening was strictly forbidden. See the list of quotes I already posted, as CFNET will automatically bring them up if your mouse-over them.

So, when talking about the church -- leavening is a risk, a work of artisanship that can fail; and leavening is not always going to be appropriate. It can mean that corruption will be part of church Growth, for example Jesus also teaches that the devil has planted weeds so that the wheat and tares used to make bread must grow up "together" -- Therefore Christs parables aren't always a "rosy" grace solves all problems... rather Jesus' parables are realistic, sometimes focusing on one detail or another.

There is no guarantee that leavening will produce consistent, positive results as the leaven itself is in a constant battle between good elements and bad ones, that are carried on the whims of the air -- both figuratively, and scientifically understood.

That's why I have no problem with JohnD's thought that the church has been 'infiltrated' when reading Matthew 13:33; for it certainly has.

He makes everything beautiful in it's time.


JLB

 

[ezrider]

Hi EzRider,

Jesus' parables, whenever he describes them, always have all elements explained as being various kinds of people and messages.

So; in Matthew 13:33, you've only described 1 element, the "leaven"; and said it is "grace", and overlooked the rest of the parable's elements.

In my thinking, Grace never rots, even after a long time or misapplication; so I'm not sure that's a very realistic fit based on what I know leaven does in reality, in a normal kitchen, etc.

If I try to set my doubts aside for a moment, I am struck with another question; how can you possibly consistently explain the rest of the parables elements?

Who, for example, is the 'woman' -- that has 'grace' -- that can plant it in some kind of 'flour' 3x over?

Can you describe the 'woman', and who or what the 'flour' is ? and explain why it's a woman, and not an angel or Jesus, or his Father doing the innoculation ? eg: to whom does the grace belong, and what is 'she' doing with it !?

John was mentioning Catholics in the OP, and I think they would knee jerk associate the word woman with 'Mary'... Which is not something most other denominations would agree with. So, it's not a doctrine that would successfully leaven the 'whole' loaf, so to speak ; but the fact that someone might try such an interpretation would definitely fit JohnD's OP's comment that the church has been 'infiltrated'...

Not that I'm accusing you or anything... it's just, well, strange that you would pick that word 'grace' and arbitrarily assign it to 'leaven' in a heated context like this....

The reason I mention it, is that "Mary" is said in scripture (Greek) to be full of "grace" AKA "favor" (perfect relationship with God κε-χαριτω-μεν-η); Luke 1:28 -- and so you're sort of setting up the parable to fall right in line with common Catholic interpretation; which pretty much is not something that I think JohnD would care for. But who knows? Maybe JohnD will surpirse me...!

First off, thank you for at least taking the time to give thought to and respond to what I have said, whereas many will not, nor will they even give it much thought. But I have not brought this in to a heated topic about everyones visions of sin, I only present the truth of the matter. Whether anyone chooses to receive the truth or reject it is up to them, mine is to but state it.

Secondly, while it may seem strange, choosing the word “grace” to define the leaven of the kingdom was not arbitrary in the slightest. In fact I was searching for a different word to describe it, but Grace is the word that stuck to the tongue, Grace is the word that the Lord impressed upon me.

You have made some comments, and hopefully you will give my response a fair consideration. Again, I did not uses the word Grace arbitrarily, nor have I ignored the rest of the parable in its application.

Matt 13:31-32 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field: Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.

Here Jesus is likening the Kingdom of heaven as something that starts small and grows into something great. A process of growth.

Matt 13:33-34 Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened. All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them.

Again, in this case the leaven is likened to something that makes the kingdom grow; and in the case of the kingdom of heaven, that leaven is grace, by faith. And so you ask, as you have asked others, who is this women, and why is it hid in three measures of meal? I have yet to see any others answer this question, instead they would rather turn something good into a sin that they might turn you away from the truth.

So who is the women? Is it not Zion, the Heavenly Jerusalem, who is mother to us all? (Gal 4:26) Is it not the women with the sun and the moon and the stars? Is not the women Wisdom? For wisdom is justified of her children (Matt 11:13).

And what are the three measures of meal that this leaven was hid in, till the whole became leavened.

Romans 5:12-14 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: (For until the law sin was in the world:but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

Death reigned from Adam until Moses, but death was not imputed unto them. This is the first measure meal leavened with Grace; And within the that first measure of meal we find the Lord making a Promise and an Oath with Abraham. The second measure of meal that was leavened with the hidden measure Grace is the Covenant made with Moses on Mt Sinai, for the Law offered the demonstration of Grace thought sacrifice for the remission of sin and that death was still not imputed unto them. And hidden within that covenant of Law remained the promise that the Lord had sworn with Abraham. The third measure of meal leavened with Grace is the new Covenant of Grace made with Christ, fulfilling the promise that the Lord had sworn unto Abraham.

In each case, the measure of Grace remain hidden, for it can only be realized through FAITH. It is why Jesus spoke in parables: that seeing they might see, yet not perceive, and hearing they might hear, yet not understand.

It is sin in the flesh that the leaven works upon. The leaven of the Law works to magnify Sin in the flesh, causing it to grow. The leaven of Grace works upon sin in our flesh to magnify the righteousness of Christ, rendering the power of sin impotent but not removed, that the glory of Christ through his Spirit might grow within us.

Romans 5:20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.


.

 

[ezrider]

Leaven has this problematic characteristic: If leaven is allowed to work too long on bread, it rots. That's the nature of leavening.
A fresh lump of flour with no leaven in it, never rots; but then, it's not very tasty either.

In my thinking, Grace never rots, even after a long time or misapplication; so I'm not sure that's a very realistic fit based on what I know leaven does in reality, in a normal kitchen, etc.

I must say that you do have an interesting take on leaven causing something to mold or rot. But I would point out that the lack of leaven leaves you none the better, for you rot in a different way, become petrified instead, cold, hard and without life. But your characterization of the leaven only shows the leaven from the wisdom of man, lacking any understanding of the kingdom of heaven.

The leaven that you speak of is leaven that is applied to dead things. The leaven of the Law is leaven applied to the dead. When you apply leaven to the dead lump, it gives the appearance of life, for it causes it to raise. But for all the leaven you apply, the grain of wheat you ground into flour shall not blossom again. Likewise, for all the leaven of the law that is applied to your members, it can only give the appearance of life, but can not sustain it, and you remain yet in your condition, dead in your sins. If you apply no leaven, then you shall find that your love has waxed cold, and your heart has been turned to stone; and the love of God far removed.

But the leaven of the Kingdom is not something that is applied to dead things. The leaven of the Kingdom of Heaven is something that is mixed in with the living, not the dead. The leaven of Grace will never rot because the leaven of grace is given out in measure by the Lord by those who are living in Him: For you must be "Born Again" to see the kingdom of the Lord

 

[About the Son of God]

I must say that you do have an interesting take on leaven causing something to mold or rot. But I would point out that the lack of leaven leaves you none the better, for you rot in a different way, become petrified instead, cold, hard and without life. But your characterization of the leaven only shows the leaven from the wisdom of man, lacking any understanding of the kingdom of heaven.

I seriously don't think that's the case and I will show what I mean in a very biblical way; although I don't dislike your post concerning wisdom and I think there is more to be said about grace and bread, much more... but I won't get to that in this post; it's going to have to be very incomplete.

But let me set you straight about the difference between man's wisdom and God's:

When the Israelites had to leave Egypt, God said not to take any leavened bread at all in order to preserve their lives, and if you know about historical travel -- there's two reasons why; 1 -- it takes time (more than a day) for certain kinds of breads to leaven and they were in a hurry, and 2 -- leavened breads take up more room, are fragile, and do not keep. ( The quotes I gave before are exhaustive of where the Greek word for leavened is used in the KJV bible, so scroll back to the post and seriously look through them and you'll see what I mean ).

Consider: On a long journey you can still eat hardtack bread, and live off of it for months on end -- as many people used to do on long voyages on ships before the invention of powered boats and airplaines, and even, yes, journeys in the desert, and I mean even back in the time of the Exodus (look up Dhourra, breads, and it's history). Unleavened breads can be made so that they keep nearly indefinitely and I have even seen pieces of hard tack in humidity controlled museums that are from the 1800's, which I am assured are still edible today. But bread which has been moistened will automatically start growing bacteria, yeast, and molds within in a matter of days and spoil. Although there may be a bacteria that could be scientifically engineered to inject a poison into the bread which killed all other bacteria and mold, while still being harmless to humans -- In bible writing days, all types of naturally (God given) leavening molded or rotted after a short time; All normal, naturally ocurring bacteria or molds used in leavening bread are able to spoil ; and worse -- all bread preservatives, by their very nature, prevent leavening from working. Things which don't stop leavening from working, such as adding honey, actually contain bacteria from contact with insects, and will rot things extremely rapidly and toxically -- or else will not allow bacteria to work at all, and no leavening effect; even Flies, for example, carry some of the most rapidly multiplying bacteria known -- and the more nutritious and tasty the food, the faster the bacteria and maggots will grow.

Consider God's own bread; the manna (bread for the journey), which the Israelites got in the desert, that particular bread came pre-leavened by God's wisdom, not man's. If there was ever an example of God's wisdom -- manna is it: ( Exodus 16:31, Exodus 16:20 )

The leaven that you speak of is leaven that is applied to dead things. The leaven of the Law is leaven applied to the dead. When you apply leaven to the dead lump, it gives the appearance of life, for it causes it to raise.

No. Those who have faith are not dead, but they are the very heart of who is in the kingdom of God; and the woman in the parable is 'hiding' leaven in the kingdom of God.

If we are the flour, then we will receive the leaven, if we are the woman -- then we will not receive the leaven, but give it to someone else; so the question is merely whether we will receive it into the stomach, or into the body, and when. For myself, I'd prefer the stomach... it's cleaner that way.

On the last day there will rise a dead churches, to the resurrection of corruption -- and a live church, to the resurrection of life. If you read revelation, you'll see what I mean -- for whole churches were judged by their doctrines, and their charity or lack of it.

Also, Read John 6:32 forward, and realize the bread in Exodus 16:20 is not alive, but is a sign of something that is alive. The Manna might as well have been made by bees or grasshoppers at God's command, for all the leavening agents it had in at God's command. Once it was wetted with water, it would rot as surely as grain.

But for all the leaven you apply, the grain of wheat you ground into flour shall not blossom again.

That's true; the bread has presumably died once, hasn't it? (I'll check the Greek, but I'll assume you're right for now). But the parable is not about bread alone; Rather isn't it obvious that the woman will eat the bread, and soon, if she is wise; and thus by her bread she will live ?
Leavened bread that is eaten in it's season is good for life, but rotten any other way.

Likewise, for all the leaven of the law that is applied to your members, it can only give the appearance of life, but can not sustain it, and you remain yet in your condition, dead in your sins. If you apply no leaven, then you shall find that your love has waxed cold, and your heart has been turned to stone; and the love of God far removed.

If that were the case, God would never tell us to use unleavened bread in the new testament; but he does say to use unleavened bread, and he does it through his apostles. In fact, the verse we're discussing about leavening is the only verse that could be taken as a contrary to a rock solid biblical rule; and it's a parable who's meaning is uncertain.

But the leaven of the Kingdom is not something that is applied to dead things. The leaven of the Kingdom of Heaven is something that is mixed in with the living, not the dead. The leaven of Grace will never rot because the leaven of grace is given out in measure by the Lord by those who are living in Him: For you must be "Born Again" to see the kingdom of the Lord

I see not a single example in the whole bible where leaven is ever applied to living things (by a woman, or a man, deliberately).

So, it seems to mt that we're taking a speculative interpretation of a single verse, (Matthew 13:33) and pitting it against the whole bible ?

But I'll say this to be conciliatory; man does not live by bread alone.
And it is the woman of the kingdom of God who applies the leaven.
Therefore, who am I to tell her not to do it? God says it, she does it, I believe it.

Therefore, if leaven can be law -- beware -- for wisdom (in your interpretation) can also be giving a law/doctine to the church in order to cause death to some and make grace abound for others.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wisdom has built her house, she has raised seven altars, and prepared the flesh, and blood red wine, and done so in full sight of all God's enemies climbing up to their high places of idols, and entering even the valleys of death, that she may tell the whole world what she has done. ( Proverbs 9:1-3, as you like #23, see: Psalm 23:5-6 )

The seraph(im) serpent, who hath lost his wings and crawls in the dust as a worm, has found a soul mate in the woman of folly, who is a thief trying to steal the bread of knowledge of good and evil, who concerns herself with 'hidden' and secret (crypt) breads, claiming they are better. Proverbs chapter 9:1-2

But as for Christ, Jesus, whom I follow; he is the true bread, an unleavened (passover bread), and that bread freely given is meat indeed: John 6:55-56, and living meat, in spite of being eaten: John 6:51 -- for while he is to be found there present, the bread is not subject to corruption.

Any in Israel that refused to eat the manna, died; Many who ate it also died.
We as Christians are to be put to the same test. John 6:53-54.

 

[eddif]

In Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 God makes a declaration about foods.

God is the God of declarations. If he needed the law as a temporal schoolmaster -- till Christ came --- So Be It.

If in the fullness of time the Christ / Messiah be come, and achieves his work, then a change is in order.

Acts 10:15
And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

There was a declaration of change.
Mark 7:19
Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?

The law was from Moses to John the Baptist. Starting with John the Kingdom was taught (he will baptize with Holy Ghost and fire).

The law had external symbols (circumcise male external member -- Kingdom circumcise heart of male and female). The grain and yeast has become the reality of the word and heart. The mind can serve the law of Christ.

If a lion can lay down with lamb there is a change, if yeast is spoken of in a different way, then I will meditate / ask till I understand. My old wine skin can not contain new wine. The new lump is not the old lump. Reba is a new lump. Contained in her is the NC work. JLB bumped up against the truth; as did others (if I really missed your drift I apologize).

Leaven did not ruin this thread. A lack of Kingdom understanding ( Matthew 20) is what is being lost.

I love you guys and ladies. This is not a personal attack. Bad doctrine needs to be gone. Rod and staff. Draw near for a hug, and swat for reproof. LOL

The jerk from Mississippi
eddif

 

[TheBarrd]

It is amazing what God can do.
I can't imagine anything more horrible, more terrifying, more disgusting than a cross meant for crucifixion. Surely one of the ugliest modes of death ever invented by men. I've read that it could take a man several days to die, hung up on one of those things...and all the while, birds pecking at his flesh...

And yet...even as we speak, hanging 'round my neck is a silver cross with a rose on it. It has become a decoration...another cross hangs on my living room wall...in fact, there are several of them scattered through this house. To Christians the cross has become a beautiful thing. Emblem of our faith, symbol of God's great love for us...we see them in our churches, on tee shirts, on women's purses and on men's wallets...almost every one of us owns at least one cross necklace...

This disgusting thing...this piece of terror, this nightmare, has become a thing of beauty, something precious...an icon of Grace.

God is amazing...

 

[eddif]

I am wondering who hijacks the faith in the work of salvation that Jesus accomplished?
1. The circumcision party
2. Those who lead you away from your first love
3. Doctrine of Nicolatans
4. Doctrine of lukewarmness
5. Synagogue of Satan
6. Doctrine of Balaam
7. The prophetess of fornication group
8. ?

There are many hijackers that would take us away from Christ Jesus.

What list are y'all using?

eddif

 

[About the Son of God]

JLB bumped up against the truth; as did others (if I really missed your drift I apologize).

I think there is evidence everywhere in what you wrote that you understood me very well.
I also liked what JLB said. God does make everything beautiful in it's season.
The leavening agents found everywhere, in soil, the air, even hanson's disease, have a purpose.
Whether there be a heap of sinners, or of the sanctified, there is a purpose for it, and a season. ( Note: I think the OP is trying to make a 'hostage' situation out of the church... which is what hijacking is all about.)

Ecclesiastes 2:24-3:2
Matthew 13:25-30 ( Same chapter as is Matthew 13:33, and just a few sentences away )

I think it may be helpful to point out one last historical note before moving on to the other points in the 'lists' -- eg: that when grain fields go to 'seed' the green grass dies and becomes white as straw, and then heads begin to droop. And if the fields are not harvested, there is a time beyond which the seed is lost upon the ground for they fall down to earth again, and rain will begin to wet the heads which will cause many of them to rot, and in the end only a few grains will survive long enough to start a new year for the wild animals, and rats, and mice and the leavening agents found in the dirt will all feed upon them leaving only man hungry for a wasted harvest.

Biblically: When a thing changes color to whiteness, that means a point of decision has been reached: A sign of a 'time' to decide or judge which kind of harvesting to do, whether for good or ill; for all are dying.

John 4:35-36, Matthew 9:36-38, Matthew 13:38-41, Revelation 14:14-15 ( Mark 9:3 )

vs.

Acts 23:3, Leviticus 13:3, Leviticus 13:10-11, Numbers 12:9-12

 

[TheBarrd]

For the rest of the day, that old song will be playing in my head:
"To everything,
turn, turn, turn
"There is a season,
turn, turn, turn
"And a time for every purpose under Heaven..."

Guess I'm just an over-age "Flower Child"

 

[Sinthesis]

The difference of there being a man in one parable and a woman in the other may just be down to the cultural norms of who sowed and who baked, and not meant to be interpreted misogynistically that the woman was up to no good.

Mat 13:31 ¶ Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field:
Mat 13:32 - Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.

Mat 13:33 ¶ Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.​

Clearly the kingdom of Heaven is likened to a mustard seed, and over time this is taken as beneficial. It is also clear that the kingdom of Heaven is likened unto leaven. Not the three measures, and not the whole lump, but the leaven. Should we then say that the kingdom of Heaven is a corrupting influence on its environment? Consider that through Jesus and the Holy Spirit we finally have free access to a spiritual life which changes our earthly lives for the better. As we spread the gospel its influence grows until the whole world is changed for the better.

As for the symbolic significance of 'three measures of meal', a good place to begin is:

Gen 18:6 - And Abraham hastened into the tent unto Sarah, and said, Make ready quickly three measures of fine meal, knead it, and make cakes upon the hearth.​

 

[TheBarrd]

I am wondering who hijacks the faith in the work of salvation that Jesus accomplished?
1. The circumcision party
2. Those who lead you away from your first love
3. Doctrine of Nicolatans
4. Doctrine of lukewarmness
5. Synagogue of Satan
6. Doctrine of Balaam
7. The prophetess of fornication group
8. ?

There are many hijackers that would take us away from Christ Jesus.

What list are y'all using?

eddif

I have no list. But if any of these, or any other thing should "hijack" me from my Lord, I have this most precious promise:

Luk 15:4 What man of you, having an hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it?
Luk 15:5 And when he hath found it, he layeth it on his shoulders, rejoicing.
Luk 15:6 And when he cometh home, he calleth together his friends and neighbours, saying unto them, Rejoice with me; for I have found my sheep which was lost.
Luk 15:7 I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance.

 

[Malachi]

Should we then say that the kingdom of Heaven is a corrupting influence on its environment?

Since these parables about the Kingdom of Heaven show both good and bad, it is not that the Kingdom of Heaven is a "corrupting influence" but that corrupting influences enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.

Just as the Enemy (Satan) sows tares (unregenerate) along with the wheat, and just as the dragnet (Christendom) brings out both good and bad fishes (false professors) from the sea, the Woman (Mystery Babylon) brings the leaven of spiritual corruption into the Kingdom of Heaven, resulting in the spread of apostasy within Christendom. This woman is called *Wickedness* in Zech 5:8 [see vv 5-11, where "Shinar" (Babylon) is mentioned].

A careful study of the introduction of false doctrines and false practices into the churches since apostolic times will confirm that today we are in the period of the Great Apostasy. One could go into great detail, but each one should study this for themselves by examining the denominations and the cults of Christendom.

 

[About the Son of God]

The difference of there being a man in one parable and a woman in the other may just be down to the cultural norms of who sowed and who baked, and not meant to be interpreted misogynistically that the woman was up to no good.

I am not interpreting it misogynically. In my initial look at the parable, the woman is handling the whole church and doing with it whatever she wants to; What fleshly woman could possibly do that? Therefore, I was not discerning based on the genitals between the legs. I said the woman is the church.

But if we change that and try to say the 'leaven' itself is the church, than that causes a logical problem; for the way that the parable of the mustard seed is written in English would be obviously inaccurate; for leaven is clearly even less than 1/99th the size of a mustard seed. The mustard seed is no longer the smallest of seeds for leaven even floats on the wind as dust.

So, I don't think he was talking about mustard seeds or yeast as being the people of the church, though I can respect that you do. It something to study.

But -- In the previous parable, a man (and at least Jesus Christ, but it could be more), plants Faith ( Luke 17:5-6 ); It is not the mustard seed itself which is the church, but the seed is Faith. Just so -- I don't see why he would follow that up with a parable where the leaven is the people and not something that corresponds to the mustard seed being Faith; eg: Church doctrines. For, doctrine is taught in parables; and a parable, itself, is meant to 'hide' the truth from some, and show it to others. That is even explicit in the passage itself, look back at Matthew 13:13.

But notice, that when Jesus spoke to his Apostles (among whom was Judas) that he explained only the first of the parables, and refused to comment on the rest -- but instead gave them MORE parables.

So, I say to you -- does not a woman put the leavened dough into an oven, and cook it with fire ? What woman in her right mind would eat leavened dough raw ?

Should we then say that the kingdom of Heaven is a corrupting influence on its environment?

Depends on what you mean by corrupting, but -- Aye ; it corrupts the rituals of Moses, as understood by the Jews if it ever uses leavened bread in a church ceremony dealing with the passover meal ; and teaches Jews to do the same.

Some church's I have gone to (once and never again) used leavened bread, and non-leavened juice to do a passover memorial with. Exactly backward from the way Jesus would have done it. But, as these people believed in Jesus Christ -- I still can't say in my heart they aren't the church, and I judge not their salvation.

Consider that through Jesus and the Holy Spirit we finally have free access to a spiritual life which changes our earthly lives for the better. As we spread the gospel its influence grows until the whole world is changed for the better.

As for the symbolic significance of 'three measures of meal', a good place to begin is:

Gen 18:6 - And Abraham hastened into the tent unto Sarah, and said, Make ready quickly three measures of fine meal, knead it, and make cakes upon the hearth.​

Leavening with bacteria and yeast is a way to increase the nutritional value of food; I will agree leavening can make our lives better ... and I agree that the passage you cite is an interesting place to start.

But have you thought about that passage carefully?

For since Sarah had to make bread 'quickly', what she made is a quickbread; The word leavening is never used in those passages.

What I see is that she made cakes (and cakes traditionally are things which clump or pack together, not light fluffy things as are made in modern kitchens.) eg: with three measures of *fresh* flour, and almost no time to get yeast going. ( Genesis 18:6 )

And as she baked, she was listening to the conversation with Abraham and the three men who came to visit them (Genesis 18:2), from behind the tent door; which is why she was making three cakes -- one cake for each of the three men. None for Abraham or herself.

And although Abraham wanted them to stay a bit longer, it is the conversation with Sarah that the three men chose to use as an excuse to depart; Sarah was the one who denied the truth and made them decide to leave, not Abraham who was doing everything possible to slow them down; But, on account of Sarah -- the three men had a conversation gone bad, and instead rose up and went on to to Sodom, with Abraham still 'hoping' to stay their wrath. ( Genesis 18:15-16 )

 

[eddif]

In another State of the Kingdom Address (Matthew 13) Jesus spoke in parabolic terms that the kingdom of God had already been infiltrated.

Matthew 13 is a very hard chapter to follow. At least as far as understanding if he is revealing or concealing the Kingdom. All multitude sessions use parables to conceal. The disciples do not receive information from parables at this time , but by the revelation aside from the multitudes.

eddif

 

[Sinthesis]

Let's try again:

Mat 13:31 ¶ Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, (the rest of the parable explains how the kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed) which a man took, and sowed in his field:
Mat 13:32 - Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.

Mat 13:33 ¶ Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, (the rest of the parable explains how the kingdom of heaven is like leaven) which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.​

Clearly the kingdom of heaven is likened to a mustard seed, and over time this is taken as beneficial. It is also clear that the kingdom of heaven is likened unto leaven. Not the three measures, and not the whole lump, but the leaven. Should we then say that the kingdom of heaven is a corrupting influence on its environment? Perhaps if you are a Jew or Pagan trying to protect your treasured status quo, but how could a Christian believe that the kingdom of heaven would be ruinous?

As for the symbolic significance of 'three measures of meal', a good place to begin is:

Gen 18:6 - And Abraham hastened into the tent unto Sarah, and said, Make ready quickly three measures of fine meal, knead it, and make cakes upon the hearth.​

Was this bread unleavened? We don't know, but if it was significant then wouldn't it be explicit? Unleavened bread is never even mentioned in the bible until Lot prepares it for those same two angels.

Gen 19:3 - And he pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in unto him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat.​

If Israelites were not to take the leaven of the Egyptians, then it should be no surprise that Lot would not use the leaven of the Sodomites. Could there be any bigger contrast between Egyptian or Sodomite leaven versus leaven that is like the kingdom of heaven?

Mat 16:12 - Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.​

The doctrine of the Pharisees, Sadducees, Egyptians, or Sodomites verses the doctrine of the Kingdom of Heaven.

 

[About the Son of God]

Let's try again:

OK. I'm game.

Mat 13:31 ¶ Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, (the rest of the parable explains how the kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed) which a man took, and sowed in his field:​

There are no commas in Greek and word order does not determine subjects of sentences in Greek. It is your decision, or the translators decision to insert a comma after mustard seed.

I could translate the sentence just as accurately:

Matthew 13:31 Another parable he put forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of God is like a man having taken a seed of mustard and sown it in his garden. ( The rest of the parable explains how the kingdom of heaven is like a field or garden that has an incredibly virulent mustard seed growing in it, it is growing faster than even the mightiest of weeds, but the word garden is or isn't mentioned depending on the version of the bible that you read. )

Please NOTE: The word, man, and the word kingdom are both in the nominative case in Greek -- therefore they are agreeable subjects of the parable regardless of word order. The mustard seed is a 'dative clause' of the sentence and is therefore relative to the kingdom and is absolutely not the subject of the parable.

I'll say it again without greeky grammar speak: A kingdom is not a kingdom without a king.
A mustard seed can't be the whole kingdom of heaven all by itself.

And the observant bible reader will realize that Kings like to plant gardens with mustard seed as one of the crops.
So in my honest opinion, from my heart of hearts -- A single tree is about as much of a garden, as a single vine is a vineyard.

If Israel was a vineyard that God planted to make wine, then it makes sense that the church is a garden chock full of mustard seed. But a single plant is not the whole kingdom.

The man, the mustard seed, the soil, and the grain are all part of the parables -- but none of them is the entire kingdom by itself. They are each just glancing images that emphasize only one aspect of the kingdom, and not the whole of it.

I agree with you that the parable about the mustard seed shows how greatly it Grew; for that is the nature of Faith:
Jesus tells us repetitively that a mustard seed is "Faith". Matthew 17:20-21
May we all have faith the size of a mustard seed.

But even the parable of the mustard seed is about death; for only when a seed falls into the ground and dies can it provide a rich harvest. John 12:24

Clearly the kingdom of heaven is likened to a mustard seed, and over time this is taken as beneficial. It is also clear that the kingdom of heaven is likened unto leaven.

I still don't see it. It's too fine of a point.

Leaven uncooked always end in corruption elsewhere in the bible, so why all the sudden is raw leaven, uneaten, a good thing ?

At least the mustard seed in the parable grew into something which birds nested in, or found shade under.

But the leaven in the parable was never said to have done anyone any good, at all; it merely put on a big show and ended totally unfinished and more importantly uneaten. God apparently never put it in his mouth, because he was in a hurry to go somewhere else and not finish the parable -- just like the three angels left Sarah in a rush, and it never says they ate her cake either.

I'm not saying God couldn't eat it -- I'm just saying the parable was left unfinished.

Not the three measures, and not the whole lump, but the leaven. Should we then say that the kingdom of heaven is a corrupting influence on its environment? Perhaps if you are a Jew or Pagan trying to protect your treasured status quo, but how could a Christian believe that the kingdom of heaven would be ruinous?

The kingdom of heaven as it is now, on earth, the vineyard, and the field, is going to be destroyed on the day of judgment. We should not say that those loyal to God, or those having faith, are going to be corrupted, I agree.

But; How can a Christian not believe that corruption and teachers who tickle peoples ears will not somehow be 'in' the church?

I don't believe or disbelieve, I know that the kingdom of heaven on earth is going to end and am not sure how leaven fits into what is 'inside' the kingdom of heaven on earth. ( Was Judas one of our number -- yes he was -- or else scripture could not be fulfilled. )

Was this bread unleavened? We don't know, but if it was significant then wouldn't it be explicit? Unleavened bread is never even mentioned in the bible until Lot prepares it for those same two angels.

Gen 19:3 - And he pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in unto him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat.​

Oh boy... you know it's the same two angels, you realize that this is just a matter of hours after Abraham and Sarah cooked for those same two angels, and you still doubt that Abraham and Sarah produced unleavened cakes?

I mean, who do you think taught Lot to cook ?! It was Sarah and Abraham who had been raising Lot as a child. I'l agree that we do not know for absolute sure that the cakes were unleavened.

But -- unless Sarah pulled a quick one, and hid some leaven in there without telling us or Abraham -- there's no reason to believe the cake was leavened. Abraham didn't tell her to leaven it. But what is surely known, is that the three angels didn't eat it, they ate only Abraham's cooking of meat, milk, and butter -- for Sarah was still in the tent cooking when they judged her denial of mocking them, and left her without so much as tasting a morsel of HER bread. ( Genesis 18:9-16 )

Did they take some of the bread for the journey ? Scripture doesn't say.

If Israelites were not to take the leaven of the Egyptians, then it should be no surprise that Lot would not use the leaven of the Sodomites. Could there be any bigger contrast between Egyptian or Sodomite leaven versus leaven that is like the kingdom of heaven?

Mat 16:12 - Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.​

The doctrine of the Pharisees, Sadducees, Egyptians, or Sodomites verses the doctrine of the Kingdom of Heaven.

There is a perfect place for the Apostles to have said, use the kingdom's leaven and not the Pharisees leaven; It's here -- but notice what's missing:

1Corinthians 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
1Corinthians 5:8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

I'm a sincere Christian, Sinthesis. Nothing more, nothing less. I don't see how you miss 1Corinthians with respect to who I AM ? I, myself, am unleavened, even if it's old fashioned. You may be ANYTHING you choose, I will not condemn you; but I prefer to be unleavened with my Lord.

The new wine, and wine-skins, are things which show biblically that leavening does indeed have a place in the new covenant. The parables in Matthew assuredly do emphasize the mustard seed itself, and the leaven itself. So -- I'm not judging you here, I'm simply talking about a preference and saying there is a deeper relationship that needs to be explored.

I know that there is a way which leavening can be applied even to the bread which can not possibly end in corruption. And I know that some people are skilled enough to give even house cats baths -- but others are not. I think were at the not quite skilled enough stage in this thread regarding leavening....