Clean versus Unclean

Q. I’m going through Leviticus in my daily devotions. What’s the meaning behind all these detailed description of uncleanness and how to deal with it? From chapter 11 all the way through 15 you have five chapters preoccupied with clean and unclean food, purification after childbirth, infectious skin diseases, mildew, and bodily discharges. What’s this all about? Why is God so meticulous about such minute matters? Is He a micro-manager?

A. God is not a nit-picker. He did not give such instructions because He didn’t have anything better to do. All the regulations were given to provide guidelines and object lessons to the Israelites that they were set apart for God and must be holy:

 Lev 11:44 I am the LORD your God; consecrate yourselves and be holy, because I am holy. Do not make yourselves unclean by any creature that moves about on the ground.
 Lev 11:45 I am the LORD who brought you up out of Egypt to be your God; therefore be holy, because I am holy.
 Lev 19:2 Speak to the entire assembly of Israel and say to them: ‘Be holy because I, the LORD your God, am holy.
 Lev 20:7 Consecrate yourselves and be holy, because I am the LORD your God.
 Lev 20:26 You are to be holy to me because I, the LORD, am holy, and I have set you apart from the nations to be my own.
 Lev 21:6 They must be holy to their God and must not profane the name of their God. Because they present the offerings made to the LORD by fire, the food of their God, they are to be holy.

The best explanation on being clean versus unclean that I came across was written by Gordon Wenham in his commentary on Leviticus. I quote the following from his work:

In Hebrew thinking everything was either clean or unclean, holy or common. Everything that is not holy is common. Common things divide into two groups, the clean and the unclean. Clean things become holy, when they are sanctified. But unclean objects cannot be sanctified. Clean things can be made unclean, if they are polluted. Finally, holy items may be defiled and become common, even polluted, and therefore unclean. The relationship between these terms is set out below:

The basic meaning of cleanness is purity. It approximates to our notion of normality. Anything that is not clean is unclean or abnormal. The greater the deviation from the norm the greater is the degree of uncleanness and the difficulty in cleansing. Another scholar, Joe Sprinkle, classified the most serious to least serious cases in descending order, based on the purification required. I extracted his cases from Lev. 11-15 as follows:

 Infectious skin diseases (Lev. 13-14)
 Childbirth (Lev. 12)
 Bodily discharges (Lev. 15:1-15, 28-30)
 Touching anything unclean (Lev. 5:2-15)
 Woman with monthly period (Lev. 15:19-24)
 Man with emission of semen (Lev. 15:16-18)
 Contamination by a carcass (Lev. 11:24-40)

The central lesson is that God is holy but human beings are contaminated. The unclean and the holy must not meet:

 Lev 7:20-21 But if anyone who is unclean eats any meat of the fellowship offering belonging to the LORD, that person must be cut off from his people. If anyone touches something unclean–whether human uncleanness or an unclean animal or any unclean, detestable thing–and then eats any of the meat of the fellowship offering belonging to the LORD, that person must be cut off from his people.
 Lev 22:3 Say to them: ‘For the generations to come, if any of your descendants is ceremonially unclean and yet comes near the sacred offerings that the Israelites consecrate to the LORD, that person must be cut off from my presence. I am the LORD.’

He further pointed out that although uncleanness cannot be equated with sin, since factors beyond human control could cause a person to be unclean, there is a strong analogy between uncleanness and sin. The whole system points to the fact that human beings are unclean or sinful by nature and cannot approach a holy God. Wenham suggested that cleanness is the natural state of most creatures. Holiness is a state of grace to which men are called by God. Uncleanness is a substandard condition to which men descend through bodily processes and sin. Men must therefore seek release from uncleanness through washing and sacrifice, which are ultimately fulfilled only in Christ.

This Morning’s Worship 1

Today we worshipped in the morning service of a church known world-wide for her emphasis on global missions. As we arrived shortly after 9 AM, we saw about a dozen or so people directing traffic in the parking lot, which was quickly filling up. Several volunteers greeted us as we walked to the main entrance, and once inside we were welcomed by a “greeter”. Lesson 1: We are not advocating marketing gimmicks, but Wal-Mart has a point in welcoming people in a friendly manner. Can our ushers do the same?

Singspiration was led by a team of 3 worship leaders, accompanied by a band of 5 musicians. There were 4 songs, 3 contemporary, plus 1 traditional “updated” to a modern tempo. “Quality” was of professional standard. One difference is that the song leader did not “preach” her own “mini-sermon” with lengthy comments on the songs. Lesson 2: There is a place for sharing, but it’s better to allow the music and the lyrics to prepare the worshippers’ hearts.

Next came the announcements and the offering, followed by a special presentation on upcoming short-term mission trips and communion. I know that some folks feel that you shouldn’t put the offering first, for fear of giving newcomers the wrong impression that the church is always after money. Others feel that announcements are not part of worship, and should be placed after the sermon.

For this particular church which morning service finishes at 10:45 AM and the second service starts at 11:30 AM, I suppose they need to clear the parking lot by 11 AM before the second group can even come in. If they have the offering and announcements after the sermon, some might leave immediately after the message and disrupt the worship for others. So everything was done before the word.

Besides, when you visit friends, don’t people present their gifts as they arrive? So when we worship God, shouldn’t we bring our offerings first, as people in OT times do? And when families gather together, don’t we share news of what’s happening? Who says announcements have no place in a family gathering? Certainly not the Bible. Most of our current practices are simply tradition. Lesson 3: The Bible did not prescribe set orders of service, so who are we to say that it can be done only one way, namely ours? God forgive us for our arrogance!

I was very impressed with this church’s mission focus. This Summer and Fall they are sending out 7 teams to 5 different locations, 1 in a First Nations reserve, 4 others in Africa, Haiti and India. In addition, they support 175 nationals and 300 missionaries, many of whom are their own members. Lesson 4: God blesses those who align their priorities with His priorities. Hope we will do the same.

Communion was served by 5 elders (I assumed) distributing 45 trays each of bread and wine to 30-40 deacons and deaconesses (again, I assumed). What was lacking was an explanation of who might partake of the Lord’s Supper, and the procedure to follow. So visitors like us did not know you don’t have to wait for everyone to partake of the elements together. I suppose everything was done to utilize the time more effectively, but non-Christians might follow what others are doing and partake inadvertently when they are not supposed to. Lesson 5: Even well-organized churches have loop-holes. We can all improve. Just be humble.

The last and main event was the Word. The guest speaker was a PhD from the UK, highly educated at Oxford and Cambridge. The message was good, but did not “wow” us. There was no Powerpoint accompaniment. The oratory skills are good, but speak more to the head than to the heart. After the closing prayer the congregation was dismissed. There was no benediction. Lesson 6: One thing good about scheduling the sermon to the end is that you leave with the message fresh in your mind. There is no dilution of its impact by the hymn of response, offering, announcements and recitation of the Lord’s prayer, for example.

As we walked back to our car, one thing I felt missing was the lack of interaction amongst fellow believers. Everyone hurried out to make way for the next service. I suppose if we were regular members, we could join other ministries such as fellowship, Sunday school or prayer meeting to make up for what the worship service couldn’t provide. One size doesn’t fit all. There are several points where we can improve, but I also felt somewhat relieved that we aren’t doing as poorly as some critics make it out to be. Lesson 7: The main thing is people adapt different means to their circumstances. So long as what we are doing is God honoring and consistent with what the Bible teaches, don’t let traditions or others’ opinions drive you. That would be idolatry.

PS One advantage of attending the morning service is that everything was done by 11 AM. But to every “pro” there is a “con”. We went for brunch, but ran into brothers & sisters from other churches at the restaurant. Now what’s a pastor doing Sunday 11:15 AM at a restaurant and not in church? Interesting!

My Schedule

A member jokingly asked, “Now that you don’t have to preach, what are you going to do with all that spare time?” I chuckled & said, “On the contrary, over the next 7 weeks I have to prepare:

1. 30 hours of bible school lectures
2. 7 sermons
3. 7 Sunday School lessons
4. 7 fellowship messages
5. 7 prayer meeting bible studies, and
6. at least 2, likely 4 workshops.”

Since I expect to be doing a lot of visitation and possibly counseling during the short-term trip, plus there will be unplanned events, there will not be much preparation time while I’m there. Everything has to be prepared in advance.

I worked the same hours this week, and will continue to do so until I depart for Panama 7 weeks from now. The only differences are that I do not need to drive to & from the church office, and I don’t need to file time sheets. I suppose if I rehash old sermons I could save a little time, but that won’t meet the people’s needs. Panama is at a different level of maturity compared to Toronto, and the challenges the congregation is facing are different.

I’ve heard that in Panama there are severe family problems, between husband & wife, parents & children, daughters & mothers-in-law, gambling addiction, etc. Every message needs to be customized to their level of understanding. It appears that the pastor has to do everything himself. The lay leaders are not at a maturity level to offer assistance in spiritual matters. So I can’t really “take it easy”.

I hope I can help alleviate some of the pressures there, and I pray I can impact a few people for the better. Pray for us so that we can be effective in this short mission trip.

Kristen “Talking”

This clip is from 2 weeks ago. Kristen doesn’t know how to talk yet, so she improvises. It just “made my day”!

How do infants learn to walk, talk, and think? The more I ponder about it, the more I’m amazed at the wisom & power of our God & Creator.

Psalm 139:14 I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well.

詩 139:14 我要稱謝你，因我受造奇妙可畏。你的作為奇妙，這是我心深知道的。

天主教與基督教一樣嗎？

有弟兄建議，可否增設中文網頁，讓中文讀者也可參與討論對談。這是很好的想法，於是取了一講座課程，轉為 PDF 作嘗試，看後果如何，請提供意見，以便改善。

有弟兄建议，可否增设中文网页，让中文读者也可参与讨论对谈。这是很好的想法，於是取了一讲座课程，转為 PDF 作尝试，看后果如何，请提供意见，以便改善。

PDF: Roman Catholicism 請按開啟 / 请按开啟

Childbirth Purification

Q. Lev 12:2-5 Say to the Israelites: ‘A woman who becomes pregnant and gives birth to a son will be ceremonially unclean for seven days, just as she is unclean during her monthly period. On the eighth day the boy is to be circumcised. Then the woman must wait thirty-three days to be purified from her bleeding. She must not touch anything sacred or go to the sanctuary until the days of her purification are over. If she gives birth to a daughter, for two weeks the woman will be unclean, as during her period. Then she must wait sixty-six days to be purified from her bleeding.’

Why is it that giving birth to a daughter takes double the time for a woman to be purified from bleeding than a son? Is there any physiological reason behind this?

A. This is a curious regulation for which the text did not give any explanation, so commentators can only speculate. Different reasons had been suggested – ranging all the way from skeptics trying to discredit the Bible, to doctors trying to find some possible biological explanation – but none is fully satisfactory. Here are some I came across:

1. The Bible is sexist – It is written by men, so it reflects the male chauvinist attitude of the day. Women were considered of lower value than men, so their purification days are longer. I cannot accept this as the Bible is inspired by God, as demonstrated by its uniqueness, historical accuracy proven by archeology, fulfilled prophecies etc., and not simply the product of men. God treats men and women as equals. Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

2. Moses copied this law from the surrounding nations – Some scholars find similarities between the Law and the rules and regulations of the pagan people in and around Canaan, and assumed that Moses copied their customs. First, similarity could imply a common source. The nations could be following Israel, not the other way around. Which came first had not been proven. But more importantly, why would God instruct Moses to copy the nations, when His principle as articulated in both the OT and NT is separation:
 Lev 18:30 Keep my requirements and do not follow any of the detestable customs that were practiced before you came and do not defile yourselves with them. I am the LORD your God.
 Deu 18:9 When you enter the land the LORD your God is giving you, do not learn to imitate the detestable ways of the nations there.
 2 Co 6:17 Therefore come out from them and be separate, says the Lord. Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you.” While the above verses pertain primarily to idolatry practices, the principle that the Israelites as a chosen people should be a “distinct society” remains.

3. That’s just the way it is – Girls are more unclean than boys, and therefore take double the time to be purified. This is not reading the text carefully. Nowhere in the passage does it say that the babies themselves, boy or girl, need purification. It is the mother that needs to be purified. The burnt offering and the sin offering is the same for a son or a daughter, indicating God treats them equally. The uncleanness is in the mother, and it is ceremonial i.e. not intrinsic, not in and of herself, but caused by the bleeding (v 4, v 5). That bleeding caused uncleanness is also attested by the comparison to the monthly period (v 2, v 5). So girls are not “dirtier” than boys, that’s just nonsense.

4. Daughters cause longer bleeding than sons, therefore need longer purification time – As far as I know, there is no scientific evidence for this assertion. Modern science simply does not support this view.

5. Daughters become women, hence double time for the two women – There is no sound reason for this. I think this is grasping at anything that fits “double”.

6. On the eighth day the boy is to be circumcised – This clue in v 3 gives an interesting thought. Proponents of this theory approach this puzzling rule positively rather than negatively. From a mother’s perspective, a longer recovery period is desirable after childbirth, and two weeks are required for the woman to at least recuperate, and 80 days (14 + 66) are needed before everything is back to normal. However, a boy must be circumcised on the eighth day, because that’s when the coagulating agent in the blood is at its peak and the circumcision cut would heal the fastest. So, the recovery period for the mother is cut short to accommodate the son’s circumcision. Of all the hypotheses I’ve read, this is the most wholesome. Still, it gives a plausible reason behind the 7 days for sons but 2 weeks for daughters, but not the 33 days verses 66 days additional purification period. For now, this is the best reason offered.

In short, I don’t know! I am more satisfied with #6 than the rest, but not fully. This is one, like so many other Bible questions, that we probably have to wait till we get to heaven for a full answer. But don’t let the ones you don’t understand hinder you from serving. Practice the ones you understand and start from there. The more you serve, the more you’ll understand.

Bundle of Joy

This is my grand-daughter Kristen:

She’s almost 9 months old, has 1 cousin 3 months younger, & expecting another cousin in about 2 week’s time.

Psalm 127:3 Sons are a heritage from the LORD, children a reward from Him.

Face to Face

Q. Ex 33: 11 The LORD would speak to Moses face to face, as a man speaks with his friend. But in v 23 God said, “Then I will remove my hand and you will see my back; but my face must not be seen.” Why is that v 11 and v 23 seems to contradict each other? Was Moses ever face to face with God?

A. There is no contradiction. While I believe in interpreting the Bible literally, that does not preclude the use of figures of speech. In Hebrew, “face to face” is often used as an idiomatic expression meaning “in a person’s presence”.

For example, when God gave the Israelites the law at Mount Sinai, He told Moses in Ex 19:12, Put limits for the people around the mountain and tell them, ‘Be careful that you do not go up the mountain or touch the foot of it. Whoever touches the mountain shall surely be put to death.’ Yet Deu 5:4 says, “The LORD spoke to you (the Israelites) face to face out of the fire on the mountain.” Did the people see God’s face? No, everyone in the camp trembled (Ex 19:16). But they stood at the foot of the mountain and were in God’s presence (Ex 19:17).

This interpretation is reinforced by Num 14:14, “And they will tell the inhabitants of this land about it. They have already heard that you, O LORD, are with these people and that you, O LORD, have been seen face to face, that your cloud stays over them, and that you go before them in a pillar of cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night.” The inhabitants of Canaan heard that the LORD had been seen face to face. Did the Israelites really saw God’s face? No, but He was with them, in a pillar of cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night.

Similarly, in Gen 32:30 Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.” But John 1:18 says, “No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father’s side, has made him known.” Now, how can Jacob see God “face to face”, when “no one has ever seen God”? The seeming contradiction is resolved once you understand “face to face” means personally, directly, or intimately.

Now, back to Ex 33:11 The LORD would speak to Moses face to face i.e. directly. Since then, no prophet has risen in Israel like Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face i.e. personally, intimately (Deu 34:10). Num 12:8 adds, “With him (Moses) I (the LORD) speak face to face, clearly and not in riddles; he sees the form of the LORD.” Moses saw only the form of the LORD i.e. His veiled glory, not His face i.e. His full, unveiled glory. Once we understand the use of idioms there is no contradiction whatsoever.