What's the Deal with Yeast? Observations Thus Far
In reading through (listening to) the Bible (I'm three books in), a few things have occurred to me:
- It's allegorical. I've for a while had the feeling that the Book of Job could not be literal--God sort of making a bet with the devil. In reading such things as the creation account and Abraham's sacrifice (widely and correctly viewed as a foreshadowing of Christ's sacrifice), it occurred to me that these things are understandably figurative as well, I think. I mean, I'm okay if they are. Things were created, maybe across epochs. Doesn't have to be days. I think it could be true that man is made of the same stuff as the rest of nature. But you know, the tempting of Eve... One can see places where pains are taken to detail something's historicity--these we can take as literal. Of course, it's this or it's man's account of his experience, divinely sanctioned.
- This must show our evolution. Right now I'm in the middle of lengthy descriptions of how the temple should be constructed and how sacrifices should be administered. Goat sacrifices. There are also mentions of death being the correct response for certain infractions, not incredibly serious ones. The Israelites are being set apart as holy, but seemingly in a way that is particular to this point in history. That point that I've heard a few times that we shouldn't hold up any pronouncement in the Old Testament too much unless we hold them all up (and we never would) seems to have some validity. Back to the original point, by the New Testament, we will see all or most of these particulars cast aside for the new era of grace.
- So what is the Old Testament for, anyway? Parts of it seem to illustrate how Christ is the fulfillment of prophecy. It's actually good to see myself type that because one thing I've thought about is that there were many self-proclaimed messiahs at the time, and people were commonly crucified. But is that what all of the Old Testament is for, an object lesson? That's how I've generally viewed it. I've imagined before that there are principles to be drawn from the Law. But the Law doesn't exactly seem to be just, for women, as an example. They're traded off as property, and it's codified. To some degree, we are told later, that the Law is for man and that it was actually a stumbling block. Completely, though? Can't be. What of these long passages where all narration is stopped and indeed, instruction is stopped but for those who would immediately carry them out? I imagine as I come across it countless people stopping right there.
- As I mentioned earlier, is it man's interpretation of things as they were occurring to him? I was definitely taught not to look at it this way. It would be problematic, the more one takes divine inspiration out of it. Can it still be there while somehow being presented through man's limited (physically and culturally) understanding? I don't know; no answer on that yet. Oh, and by the way,
- There is some crazy drama in the Bible. On a Desperate Housewives level. It occurs several times that a man and wife will enter a land and he will tell her to pretend to be his sister because otherwise men will want to kill him. So she does, and then the leader of that land will accost the first man for tricking him thusly. In another instance, the people of a land rape a family's sister, and the men of that family kill all of the offending parties in retaliation. Some of the things I am coming across seem barbaric, but I will admit that here this seems to be justice. In reference to the title here, though, and I'm sure there's a simple answer that can be found through a simple Google search, why is it always that yeast is forbidden?
- It's allegorical. I've for a while had the feeling that the Book of Job could not be literal--God sort of making a bet with the devil. In reading such things as the creation account and Abraham's sacrifice (widely and correctly viewed as a foreshadowing of Christ's sacrifice), it occurred to me that these things are understandably figurative as well, I think. I mean, I'm okay if they are. Things were created, maybe across epochs. Doesn't have to be days. I think it could be true that man is made of the same stuff as the rest of nature. But you know, the tempting of Eve... One can see places where pains are taken to detail something's historicity--these we can take as literal. Of course, it's this or it's man's account of his experience, divinely sanctioned.
- This must show our evolution. Right now I'm in the middle of lengthy descriptions of how the temple should be constructed and how sacrifices should be administered. Goat sacrifices. There are also mentions of death being the correct response for certain infractions, not incredibly serious ones. The Israelites are being set apart as holy, but seemingly in a way that is particular to this point in history. That point that I've heard a few times that we shouldn't hold up any pronouncement in the Old Testament too much unless we hold them all up (and we never would) seems to have some validity. Back to the original point, by the New Testament, we will see all or most of these particulars cast aside for the new era of grace.
- So what is the Old Testament for, anyway? Parts of it seem to illustrate how Christ is the fulfillment of prophecy. It's actually good to see myself type that because one thing I've thought about is that there were many self-proclaimed messiahs at the time, and people were commonly crucified. But is that what all of the Old Testament is for, an object lesson? That's how I've generally viewed it. I've imagined before that there are principles to be drawn from the Law. But the Law doesn't exactly seem to be just, for women, as an example. They're traded off as property, and it's codified. To some degree, we are told later, that the Law is for man and that it was actually a stumbling block. Completely, though? Can't be. What of these long passages where all narration is stopped and indeed, instruction is stopped but for those who would immediately carry them out? I imagine as I come across it countless people stopping right there.
- As I mentioned earlier, is it man's interpretation of things as they were occurring to him? I was definitely taught not to look at it this way. It would be problematic, the more one takes divine inspiration out of it. Can it still be there while somehow being presented through man's limited (physically and culturally) understanding? I don't know; no answer on that yet. Oh, and by the way,
- There is some crazy drama in the Bible. On a Desperate Housewives level. It occurs several times that a man and wife will enter a land and he will tell her to pretend to be his sister because otherwise men will want to kill him. So she does, and then the leader of that land will accost the first man for tricking him thusly. In another instance, the people of a land rape a family's sister, and the men of that family kill all of the offending parties in retaliation. Some of the things I am coming across seem barbaric, but I will admit that here this seems to be justice. In reference to the title here, though, and I'm sure there's a simple answer that can be found through a simple Google search, why is it always that yeast is forbidden?
Comments