This has truly been one of those days where I have not had a moment to myself (except lunch). I was able to get the passage read rather superficially while eating my lunch, but that's about all the time I've been able to give to it today. What a discouraging day! Not just in regards to my private quiet time, but many things. The bright spot in my day (completely irrelevant to this passage) has been a visit from friends and my daughter giving her daddy kisses for the first time. For now, I'm going to bed.
Tomorrow's Reading: Leviticus 16:1-34
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Monday, January 10, 2011
Leviticus 14:1-32
Luke 17:11-19 is where you can find the story of the ten lepers whom Jesus healed. Reading the passages in Leviticus about what was required to live as a leper under the Old Testament system, from diagnosis to healing and cleansing, gives a greater appreciation for what was required for these lepers to be declared clean again and accepted back into society. Interesting, isn't it, that the one leper who turned back before he had even reached a priest was a Samaritan? It was quite a lengthy process to be cleansed, as we see here in chapter 14. I suppose you could try to make the excuse that the other nine intended to return to Christ and thank him after they were finished with the purification process. Only the Samaritan had good sense, though, to realize that he may or may not find Jesus again so easily, that maybe it was more important to praise God and thank his Savior than to go through the rituals. After all, didn't God say, "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit" (Psalm 51:17) and "I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice, the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings" (Hosea 6:6). There are some things God prizes above the fulfillment of rituals. Granted, the Old Testament Law should not be looked upon as merely ritual: this is what was required to live in the presence of the Holy God, as the Israelite camp did day-in and day-out. It was simply that God did not desire the rote practice of the Law, but rather that the Law be practiced out of a loving and obedient heart. Such a heart the Samaritan had, and likely retained throughout the protracted ceremonies. But I wonder, what about the other nine?
(I sure hope I'm not stealing my own thunder for Luke 17! But then, it is another year and a half before I'll come to that passage, so maybe it won't matter, or I'll be struck by something else completely then.)
Note: I've actually been working on this short post all day, off and on. While I'd like to devote time in the morning to this, I can't say I can complain about being in and out of the Word all day, with these things twirling around in my mind like good background music.
(I sure hope I'm not stealing my own thunder for Luke 17! But then, it is another year and a half before I'll come to that passage, so maybe it won't matter, or I'll be struck by something else completely then.)
Note: I've actually been working on this short post all day, off and on. While I'd like to devote time in the morning to this, I can't say I can complain about being in and out of the Word all day, with these things twirling around in my mind like good background music.
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Leviticus 12:1-13:59
A very good friend of mine once told me a story about how she and her brother and sisters played "leper" as kids. They would throw towels or blankets over their heads and walk about crying out, "Unclean! Unclean!" so that all may know their leprosy and not come near. Whether they based the game on this passage or on stories from the New Testament, I don't know. If you think it unlikely that a bunch of kids would know a passage in Leviticus, you haven't met this family. :)
I couldn't help but think of my friend and her siblings as I read this passage. It is such a funny story to think of a bunch of kids wandering around their farm, yelling "Unclean!" And yet, it's also a little heartbreaking when you compare it to these Scriptures. The truth is, there were people who for thousands of years under the Old Testament Law who did have to shun the company of others and have to call out warnings of their uncleanness to those who might pass them by. They were ostracized for fear that their disease was infectious, and therefore dangerous. It was necessary, but how difficult would it be to send your son or daughter away, your mother or brother, dad or uncle, knowing that you would likely never live with them again? To fear that you might be infected already and only a matter of time would show it on your skin. What would it be like to be subjected to a priest for examination, one who may fear the Lord and have compassion, or one who loves his position more than God or people and looks at you with distaste? I couldn't help but think these things and imagine being shut up for seven days while we wait to see if the spot, sore, or abscess is infectious or not. It gives me a greater appreciation for the joy of the lepers Jesus healed, the relief and excitement of being able to present oneself to the priest with the proper offering, be examined and pronounced clean again. And it amazes me all the more that only the single leper returned to worship at Christ's feet. What an incredible gift the Lord gave them! And only one thought to return to their Savior and thank Him.
I want to say, "I hope I'll never be like that," but I have to examine myself and be sure that I never have. Have I ever taken a blessing for granted? Have I ever received and not given back? It's a very humbling question. Lord, may I not have that attitude again, and give You daily thanks for all that You have given me!
I couldn't help but think of my friend and her siblings as I read this passage. It is such a funny story to think of a bunch of kids wandering around their farm, yelling "Unclean!" And yet, it's also a little heartbreaking when you compare it to these Scriptures. The truth is, there were people who for thousands of years under the Old Testament Law who did have to shun the company of others and have to call out warnings of their uncleanness to those who might pass them by. They were ostracized for fear that their disease was infectious, and therefore dangerous. It was necessary, but how difficult would it be to send your son or daughter away, your mother or brother, dad or uncle, knowing that you would likely never live with them again? To fear that you might be infected already and only a matter of time would show it on your skin. What would it be like to be subjected to a priest for examination, one who may fear the Lord and have compassion, or one who loves his position more than God or people and looks at you with distaste? I couldn't help but think these things and imagine being shut up for seven days while we wait to see if the spot, sore, or abscess is infectious or not. It gives me a greater appreciation for the joy of the lepers Jesus healed, the relief and excitement of being able to present oneself to the priest with the proper offering, be examined and pronounced clean again. And it amazes me all the more that only the single leper returned to worship at Christ's feet. What an incredible gift the Lord gave them! And only one thought to return to their Savior and thank Him.
I want to say, "I hope I'll never be like that," but I have to examine myself and be sure that I never have. Have I ever taken a blessing for granted? Have I ever received and not given back? It's a very humbling question. Lord, may I not have that attitude again, and give You daily thanks for all that You have given me!
Saturday, January 8, 2011
UPDATE on Leviticus 11:1-47
After some more reading, I found a few reasons why God may have chosen that animals that come under specific exceptions might be unclean. Mainly, the information comes from a commentary, "A Commentary, Critical and Explanatory, on the Old and New Testaments," by Robert Jamieson, A.R. Fusset, and David Brown, dating from 1871. In their comments on this particular passage, they list two possible reasons for these restrictions: 1) to ensure distinction between the Jews and surrounding nations they were not to co-mingle with, and 2) dietary reasons. Both make some sense. Jews were known throughout their history for their distaste for certain foods based on their religious law, and at times of captivity or oppression, even used that distinction as a basis for looking down upon their oppressors. The fact that they would detest or have a distaste for food their neighbors were eating would provide a barrier for completely assimilating into other nations, no matter how much they might adopt the strangers' habits (which was still not good). Dietary reasons for excluding certain foods and preparation practices include that these meats or practices may have led to a greater risk of illness and disease amongst a large people living in close quarters.
Leviticus 11:1-47
This is one of those passages where the resounding question in my mind was, "But, why?" I saw the logic of it: whatever chews cud and has a cloven foot, both, are acceptable to eat. But if they don't have both criteria, they are not acceptable to you; therefore, the camel, the rock badger, etc. are not acceptable. No problem, I get that. But why do these things constitute defilement? Why isn't it the other way around? It's not the logic of how the rule works by why the rule in the first place I don't understand. I've been reading some commentaries and they have yet to explain that to me. They are perfectly capable of explaining the rule, which I already understand, and even the principle of abstaining from that which defiles us, even today, which I also understand. But why does God say that the cloven-footed cud-chewer is acceptable, but the non-cloven-footed cud-chewer, or the non-cud-chewing cloven-footed are not?
I've been wondering if there really isn't a particular reason, other than that the Lord has decreed this and it is to teach the principle that some things can defile us (like, say, lying, murder, sex outside of marriage, gossiping, hating our brothers, Christian or familial) and therefore we should detest them and abstain from them. (If you don't believe me on the parenthetical examples, check out Colossians 3:5, 2 Timothy 3:5, 1 John 3:14-15, Ephesians 5:19-21, just to name a few). Granted, I've not yet exhausted my commentaries and helps, and I by no means have an exhaustive library with which to research. Maybe the answer's out there and I just haven't found it. But from the standpoint of someone who is simply reading through Leviticus, this principle makes sense: there are things in life that make us unclean, that will separate us from the Lord. And we are to avoid them, abstain from them, not only that but to hate them and detest them. After all, they separate us from our Lord. If only we had that attitude towards the sin in our lives! If only we understood how the seemingly "little sins" can make us unclean and can taint our relationship with the Lord! Things that perhaps we think we can slide by with. Or that we are only hurting ourselves with. But one thing I am learning for sure from Leviticus (and I know will be supported in Numbers and Joshua, definitely), that one sin among the people of Israel affected the entirety of Israel: look at Moses' warnings to Aaron and his sons after Nadab and Abihu. Does it not work the same for the church? This is not a call to point fingers at other people, by no means! (To borrow a Paul-like phrase.) But perhaps it's an even greater call to examine our own lives and make sure that we are confessing our sins to the One who is faithful to forgive: our sin affects our relationship with the Lord and our relationship with others. It makes us unclean.
Tomorrow's Reading: Leviticus 12:1-13:59
I've been wondering if there really isn't a particular reason, other than that the Lord has decreed this and it is to teach the principle that some things can defile us (like, say, lying, murder, sex outside of marriage, gossiping, hating our brothers, Christian or familial) and therefore we should detest them and abstain from them. (If you don't believe me on the parenthetical examples, check out Colossians 3:5, 2 Timothy 3:5, 1 John 3:14-15, Ephesians 5:19-21, just to name a few). Granted, I've not yet exhausted my commentaries and helps, and I by no means have an exhaustive library with which to research. Maybe the answer's out there and I just haven't found it. But from the standpoint of someone who is simply reading through Leviticus, this principle makes sense: there are things in life that make us unclean, that will separate us from the Lord. And we are to avoid them, abstain from them, not only that but to hate them and detest them. After all, they separate us from our Lord. If only we had that attitude towards the sin in our lives! If only we understood how the seemingly "little sins" can make us unclean and can taint our relationship with the Lord! Things that perhaps we think we can slide by with. Or that we are only hurting ourselves with. But one thing I am learning for sure from Leviticus (and I know will be supported in Numbers and Joshua, definitely), that one sin among the people of Israel affected the entirety of Israel: look at Moses' warnings to Aaron and his sons after Nadab and Abihu. Does it not work the same for the church? This is not a call to point fingers at other people, by no means! (To borrow a Paul-like phrase.) But perhaps it's an even greater call to examine our own lives and make sure that we are confessing our sins to the One who is faithful to forgive: our sin affects our relationship with the Lord and our relationship with others. It makes us unclean.
Tomorrow's Reading: Leviticus 12:1-13:59
Friday, January 7, 2011
Leviticus 9:1-10:20
Ever have one of those days where things just did not go according to plan? Not necessarily a bad day (in fact, it ended very well), just... not remotely like you'd hoped. I could go into the details of the day, but that's really my other blog. Suffice it to say that it's after 10:00 and I'm just now sitting down to do my reading for the day. I am definitely going to do better tomorrow.
I could just say, "I read my reading for today" and sign off. But I don't really want to do that too much. This is my time to "chew the cud", if you'll excuse the expression, and I don't want to miss out on that if I don't have to. So, though my bed is softly calling my name just behind my back, my pillow inviting me to lay down and catch up on the sleep I missed last night, I am steadfastly and doggedly committed to this post.
I'm actually rather glad that these two chapters were read together on my schedule, because they're a very good juxtaposition. In chapter 9, we see Aaron just after his consecration beginning to enact the sacrifices that the Lord has commanded, and we see a constant refrain: "as the Lord commanded Moses." Holy fire from the Lord comes out and consumes Aaron's offerings, and this is almost as a benediction, or a sign of approval. They've been accepted. Then, just after this in chapter 10, two of Aaron's sons offer fire before the Lord. And the Lord's holy fire blazes again: but this time it consumes Aaron's sons, killing them. This is not a blessing; this is not approval. They have been executed for offering unauthorized fire before the Lord. Could what they did truly have been that bad?
That seems to be the statement the Lord is trying to make. The essence of the Law is to follow it: word for word. Aaron's sons defied God's Word when they offered a fire before Him that was not lawful and was not holy. They sinned before the Lord, whether out of carelessness or pride or what have you; they sinned. And the Lord cannot abide with sin. It may seem a spectacular judgement, to consume them with fire, but in the context of the passage, is it really that outrageous? We have already mentioned that God used fire to show approval of the sin, peace, guilt, and grain offerings just given. Is it any more unreasonable to show disapproval in a similar manner? It certainly caused people to stop and consider the consequences for being flippant or for disregarding the Lord's instructions. I would certainly have thought twice, if I had been Aaron or one of his surviving sons, to be careful to follow the Lord's instructions in all matters.
A side note: this reminds me of a comment that one of my professors in Bible college made. He noted once that when God is starting a "new phase" in His plan that it is often accompanied by some spectacular events. The promise to Abraham: Abraham and Sarah give birth in the old age. Bringing Israel out of Egypt as a great nation: the parting of the Red Sea, the manna from Heaven, the Pillar of Cloud and of Fire (the list can go on and on here). The beginning of the sacrificial system: Nadab and Abihu being consumed by fire; Christ's advent, His ministry, His death and resurrection. The miracles that accompanied the beginning of the church, and Ananias and Sapphira. What this means, I can't say that I'm the expert to tell you. Maybe this is God's way of showing He's really at work here, I don't know. But it is interesting to note. (How's that for a LONG and committed post?)
Tomorrow's Reading: Leviticus 11:1-47
I could just say, "I read my reading for today" and sign off. But I don't really want to do that too much. This is my time to "chew the cud", if you'll excuse the expression, and I don't want to miss out on that if I don't have to. So, though my bed is softly calling my name just behind my back, my pillow inviting me to lay down and catch up on the sleep I missed last night, I am steadfastly and doggedly committed to this post.
I'm actually rather glad that these two chapters were read together on my schedule, because they're a very good juxtaposition. In chapter 9, we see Aaron just after his consecration beginning to enact the sacrifices that the Lord has commanded, and we see a constant refrain: "as the Lord commanded Moses." Holy fire from the Lord comes out and consumes Aaron's offerings, and this is almost as a benediction, or a sign of approval. They've been accepted. Then, just after this in chapter 10, two of Aaron's sons offer fire before the Lord. And the Lord's holy fire blazes again: but this time it consumes Aaron's sons, killing them. This is not a blessing; this is not approval. They have been executed for offering unauthorized fire before the Lord. Could what they did truly have been that bad?
That seems to be the statement the Lord is trying to make. The essence of the Law is to follow it: word for word. Aaron's sons defied God's Word when they offered a fire before Him that was not lawful and was not holy. They sinned before the Lord, whether out of carelessness or pride or what have you; they sinned. And the Lord cannot abide with sin. It may seem a spectacular judgement, to consume them with fire, but in the context of the passage, is it really that outrageous? We have already mentioned that God used fire to show approval of the sin, peace, guilt, and grain offerings just given. Is it any more unreasonable to show disapproval in a similar manner? It certainly caused people to stop and consider the consequences for being flippant or for disregarding the Lord's instructions. I would certainly have thought twice, if I had been Aaron or one of his surviving sons, to be careful to follow the Lord's instructions in all matters.
A side note: this reminds me of a comment that one of my professors in Bible college made. He noted once that when God is starting a "new phase" in His plan that it is often accompanied by some spectacular events. The promise to Abraham: Abraham and Sarah give birth in the old age. Bringing Israel out of Egypt as a great nation: the parting of the Red Sea, the manna from Heaven, the Pillar of Cloud and of Fire (the list can go on and on here). The beginning of the sacrificial system: Nadab and Abihu being consumed by fire; Christ's advent, His ministry, His death and resurrection. The miracles that accompanied the beginning of the church, and Ananias and Sapphira. What this means, I can't say that I'm the expert to tell you. Maybe this is God's way of showing He's really at work here, I don't know. But it is interesting to note. (How's that for a LONG and committed post?)
Tomorrow's Reading: Leviticus 11:1-47
Thursday, January 6, 2011
Leviticus 8:1-36
Experiencing technical difficulties with Blogger, so I'll just note that I read this passage on the consecration of the priests. Hopefully this will post with little difficulty.
Tomorrow's Reading: Leviticus 9:1-10:20
Tomorrow's Reading: Leviticus 9:1-10:20
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)