The Bible's Laws concerning Mildew

Astral · Post by **Astral** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 4:53 am

Actualy extracted word for word from a bible, this has to be one of the funnyest paragraths conserning ritualistic burning of clothes I've ever hurd.

---

Laws Concerning Mildew:

47 When there is mildew on clothing, whether wool or linen,
48or on any piece of linen or wool cloth or on leather or anything made of leather, 49 if it is greenish or reddish, it is a spreading mildew and must be shown to the priest. 50 The priest shall examine it and put the object away for seven days. 51 He shall examine it again on the seventh day, and if the mildew has spread, the object is unclean. 52 The priest shall burn it, because it is a spreading mildew which must be destroyed by fire.
53 But if, when he examines it, the priest finds that the mildew has not spread on the object, 54he shall order it to be washed and put away for another seven days. 55 Then he shall examine it, and if the mildew has not changed colour, even though it has not spread, it is still unclean; you must burn the object, whether the rot is on the front or the back. 56 But if, when the priest examines it again, the mildew has faded, he shall tear it out of the clothing or leather. 57 Then, if the mildew reappears, it is spreading again, and the owner shall burn the object. 58 If he washes the object and the spot disappears, he shall wash it again, and it will be ritually clean.
59 This, then, is the law about mildew on clothing, whether it is wool or linen, or on linen or wool cloth or on anything made of leather; this is how the decision is made as to whether it is ritually clean or unclean.

Narnian · Post by **Narnian** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 6:01 am

And this has what to do with the price of beans in Toledo?

Leviticus (where this is from) has a lot of health related rituals that may not have been fully understood by the people but were passed to them by God for their own protection.

Have you heard of toxic mold (Stachybotrys chartarum)? Whole houses have had to be torn down because of it. I have mold allergies myself and need to be careful.

It may seem funny and quaint by us but it may have meant life and death to them.

Bigdude · Post by **Bigdude** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 9:58 am

Most of these "health and safety codes" were VERY good things then and aren't a half-bad guide now. They constitute one of the best proofs that there's *some* sort of higher guide behind the bible.

Note that in almost all cases, violating these wasn't a "sin against God" and was punished by what we'd call quarantine - that's the net effect of somebody a person being declared temporarily "unclean". In other words, if a Jew was starving and ALL there was available to eat was pig, they could do so without violating their faith so long as they followed the quarantine procedures afterwards, which weren't all that harsh and certainly not life-threatening.

There's a book I read recently titled "Guns, Germs and Steel" by Jared Diamond that tries to explain why some areas of the world developed very high tech levels while others didn't. It's a very good read but among other points is the fact that cities themselves "created" diseases previously unknown - most wouldn't have existed 3,000 years ago when Leviticus was written. Had the Jewish "quarantine" and other health procedures been followed, it's doubtful they would have at all.

Astral · Post by **Astral** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 10:01 am

Yeah, reading it back to myself I supose your right. Just the way it was read this morning made me get thease pictures of preast screaming 'Unclean!' at a shirt with a speck of moss on it

I should have found that redition, this isn't quite the same

Zorro · Post by **Zorro** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 11:12 am

Mildew in a Dessert?

I am sure if you look hard enough there are instructions on coke bottle deposits too.

I think I will consult a Mycologist on the subject of Mildew!

SolidusRaccoon · Post by **SolidusRaccoon** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 12:09 pm

Astral wrote:Yeah, reading it back to myself I supose your right. Just the way it was read this morning made me get thease pictures of preast screaming 'Unclean!' at a shirt with a speck of moss on it
I should have found that redition, this isn't quite the same

Heh heh heh, better call Mr. Clean.

Bigdude · Post by **Bigdude** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 12:21 pm

I've seen desserts mildew. Leave a slice of pie in the fridge too long...

Oh, wait, you meant DESERT?

One, the climate has shifted some since then. Two, much of Israel is mountainous and snows in the winter. Bethlehem is one such, in fact the part about sheep in the field is a sure sign Jesus wasn't born in mid-winter.

Zorro · Post by **Zorro** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 9:05 pm

Checking the reference books I have. My best index that is just a comprehensive index and cross reference that is 1295 pages in length.

On the subject of Mildew there is................Nothing.

Between the Words Migol and Mina here is not one noted reference to Mildew.

LoneWolf23k · Post by **LoneWolf23k** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:47 am

bigdude wrote:Most of these "health and safety codes" were VERY good things then and aren't a half-bad guide now. They constitute one of the best proofs that there's *some* sort of higher guide behind the bible

Or at least some good sense amongst the people who wrote the "health codes" section. 'Cause there are some other laws which are just plain barbaric:
Dt 21:18: "If a man has a stubborn or rebellious son who will not listen to the voice of his father or his mother, even when they punish him 21:19: his father and mother must take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. 21:20: They shall say to the elders "This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard. 21:21: All the men of the town must then stone him to death. You must banish this evil from among you."

I wish I could say that Jesus' coming and teachings meant an end to such brutality, but there are some of Paul's Epistles to consider:
1 tm 6:1: "All those who are under the yoke of slavery must have unqualified respect for their masters, so that the name of God and our teaching is not brought into disrepute." Tt 2:9: "Slaves must be obedient to their masters in everything, and do what is wanted without argument." Tt 2:10: "And there must be no pilfering. They must show complete honesty at all times so that they are a credit in every way to the teaching of God our Saviour." 1 P 2:18: "Slaves, you should obey your masters respectfully, not only those who are kind and reasonable but also those who are difficult to please." 1 Co 7:21: "Even if you have a chance of freedom, you should prefer to make full use of your condition as a slave."

So, even the Bible is, at best, "pick-and-choose". Me, I like to focus mainly on the core of Jesus' teachings: "Do on to others as you would want them do onto you," "forgive those who offend you," and "do not sin." Beyond that, I don't think God really cares whether or not I eat shrimp or not.*

*Lv 11:10: "But anything in the seas or rivers that does not have fins and scales, regard as an abomination. Do not eat their meat and regard their carcasses as an abomination."

Bigdude · Post by **Bigdude** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 8:34 am

The "slavery" bit by Paul looks worse than it is; in most cases a more correct modern translation would be "employee" for all practical purposes. It was a different time, "employment" as we know it today didn't exist but often "voluntary slavery" amounted to something pretty close.

No argument re: DT.

My thinking is that there WAS a supernatural force going on, but that the "signal got scrambled some". To what degree I have no idea.

Frost Wraith · Post by **Frost Wraith** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 9:10 am

LoneWolf23k wrote:
Or at least some good sense amongst the people who wrote the "health codes" section. 'Cause there are some other laws which are just plain barbaric:
Dt 21:18: "If a man has a stubborn or rebellious son who will not listen to the voice of his father or his mother, even when they punish him 21:19: his father and mother must take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. 21:20: They shall say to the elders "This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard. 21:21: All the men of the town must then stone him to death. You must banish this evil from among you."

Yes this was very violent and brutal but theres a reason behind that. This was the age before the first coming of Christ. There was no saving grace. This was very much the wrath of God. His first and only rule he had given to Adam was broken and sin unleashed upon the world. And God will not take sin. Sin is only clensed by blood and suffering. That is why sacrifices were offered up regulary, the blood of animals, and the sacrafices had to be prepared in a specific way. This is also why the punishments often resulted in death, because it was the only way the sin could be paied. Jesus, was the Son of God and who was sinless. The act of him atoning for the sins of the people, resulted in the debt being canceled out to all those who accept it. THIS, is why we do not sacrafice animals or use such fatal punishments anymore. We have been provided grace.

LoneWolf23k wrote: I wish I could say that Jesus' coming and teachings meant an end to such brutality, but there are some of Paul's Epistles to consider:
1 tm 6:1: "All those who are under the yoke of slavery must have unqualified respect for their masters, so that the name of God and our teaching is not brought into disrepute." Tt 2:9: "Slaves must be obedient to their masters in everything, and do what is wanted without argument." Tt 2:10: "And there must be no pilfering. They must show complete honesty at all times so that they are a credit in every way to the teaching of God our Saviour." 1 P 2:18: "Slaves, you should obey your masters respectfully, not only those who are kind and reasonable but also those who are difficult to please." 1 Co 7:21: "Even if you have a chance of freedom, you should prefer to make full use of your condition as a slave."

That is simply speaking the day. You cannot read the Bible and forget the day and time these men were speaking to. Slavery was not the horrible evil we see it as today. In fact, in contrast to today, many people volunteered for slavery. Because the slave actually had a somewhat high standing. They were much much more than the un employed, a bit mroe than the ordinary man, and even more than some slave owners, depending on who you were owned by. BigDude was right in saying it can translate into employee. Thats very much what they were like. The speaker is neither condeming nor condoning slavery. He is simply speaking to the times and saying that those in employment and slavery are to be honest, hardworking, and respectful. Even if your owner is a jerk. Beign a slave is no excuse to being sinful.

LoneWolf23k wrote: So, even the Bible is, at best, "pick-and-choose". Me, I like to focus mainly on the core of Jesus' teachings: "Do on to others as you would want them do onto you," "forgive those who offend you," and "do not sin." Beyond that, I don't think God really cares whether or not I eat shrimp or not.*

Noits' not, really. Its all good I am starting to find as I learn. You just have to read it in it's context.

LoneWolf23k wrote: *Lv 11:10: "But anything in the seas or rivers that does not have fins and scales, regard as an abomination. Do not eat their meat and regard their carcasses as an abomination."

14Again Jesus called the crowd to him and said,

Ransom Returns · Post by **Ransom Returns** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 10:52 am

A word on slavery: Aside from the historical context as mentioned above, the book of Philemon is helpful as well (read it, it's barely a page long). A slave with a Christian master (Philemon) escapes, finds Paul in Rome, and is converted. Paul chooses to send him back, but also writes Philemon a letter.

Paul niether proclaims man's inherent rights, nor claims that Philemon has the right to do as he pleases. In fact (1:8-9) he refuses to order Philemon to take any action but appeals to his slave's standing as a Christian brother to affect how he is treated (17-18).

What confuses people is that Paul sees slavery in the context of the community of believers, not as a mere issue of individual rights. Within that context, slavery as we understand it can not exist consistently the commands of Christ to love one another.

Frost Wraith · Post by **Frost Wraith** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 11:05 am

Exactly

Manytails · Post by **Manytails** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 11:19 am

Ransom Returns wrote: What confuses people is that Paul sees slavery in the context of the community of believers, not as a mere issue of individual rights. Within that context, slavery as we understand it can not exist consistently the commands of Christ to love one another.

What most "Christians" forget is:
We, as belivers in Christ, are supposed to be servants of God. God puts us in situations, roles that are to be beneficial to both God and his servants as a whole. Therefore, if we are a slave, then it is in our best interest to be a willing and obedient slave, that by our service our "Master" is brought closer to God, who is our true Master. If we are a slaves "Master", then we must remember that we are merely an Overseer, and must in turn treat the slaves with the respect that God, Our Master expects his properties to be treated.

--

Ransom Returns · Post by **Ransom Returns** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 12:00 pm

manytails wrote:
Ransom Returns wrote: What confuses people is that Paul sees slavery in the context of the community of believers, not as a mere issue of individual rights. Within that context, slavery as we understand it can not exist consistently the commands of Christ to love one another.
What most "Christians" forget is:
We, as belivers in Christ, are supposed to be servants of God. God puts us in situations, roles that are to be beneficial to both God and his servants as a whole. Therefore, if we are a slave, then it is in our best interest to be a willing and obedient slave, that by our service our "Master" is brought closer to God, who is our true Master. If we are a slaves "Master", then we must remember that we are merely an Overseer, and must in turn treat the slaves with the respect that God, Our Master expects his properties to be treated.

--

Agreed.

LoneWolf23k · Post by **LoneWolf23k** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 12:48 pm

My apologies. I'm glad to see that many of the more "eccentric" rules of the old testament have been more or less "amended" over the years. I'm kinda iffy about the bit about slavery, though. Taken at face value, those words can be used to justify the enslavement of one's fellow man, such as the southern enslavement of blacks prior to the civil war.

And I only brought up the Leviticus quotes to point out how silly and out-dated they are. I'm glad even fellow christians agree.

Bolo Unit_BRL of the Line · Mon Mar 14, 2005 12:59 pm

The only laws you truely need are the Ten Commandments. Every just law created can be filed under one of those first ten laws. However, we get stuff like Leviticus because man ever loves to complicate things. Ten simple rules are not enough, they say, we need to specialize and complicate! Thus we see the laws about the correct amount of reparation required if your bullock escapes its pen and gores someone to death, et cetera, et cetera, and et cetera.

RHJunior · Post by **RHJunior** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 3:51 pm

The commandments in the bible were never "amended." Other scriptures expanded on or clarified various points.

As to "slavery,"

What the scriptures referred to as "slave" is more accurately translated today as INDENTURED SERVANT.

Minor points about judaic slavery:

It was often done as a means of paying off a debt.
It was for a limited number of years only--- to the end of the contract, or to the Year of Jubilee, whichever came first.
The master was legally obligated to provide for all the slaves' needs--- food, clothing, shelter, medicine.
Any physical abuse was legal grounds for immediate termination of the contract.
Once free, the slave could buy the rest of his family out of that house or otherwise bargain for such.
At the end of the contract, the servant had the option of choosing to become a servant for life--- if they so chose, they had their ear pierced and were given a gold earring as a mark of their choice.

And kidnapping someone and selling them into slavery was called "manstealing," and was punishable by execution.

Full legal protection. Mandatory room and board. Full medical. And a legally binding contract with an option for a lifetime contract at the end of the terms.

**Salaried Employees** should get such a good deal!

Aurrin · Post by **Aurrin** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:40 pm

Bear in mind that the New Testament supercedes the Old Testament, as God basically said 'This isn't working, so I'll set up a new system.' Much of the Levitical law was made obselete when Jesus rewrote the rulebooks to better reflect the spirit of the law rather than so many legal entanglements. Nowhere is this clearer than in the Golden Rule, which completely encompasses the Ten Commandments.

Artemel · Post by **Artemel** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:54 pm

Bolo Unit_BRL of the Line wrote:The only laws you truely need are the Ten Commandments. Every just law created can be filed under one of those first ten laws. However, we get stuff like Leviticus because man ever loves to complicate things. Ten simple rules are not enough, they say, we need to specialize and complicate! Thus we see the laws about the correct amount of reparation required if your bullock escapes its pen and gores someone to death, et cetera, et cetera, and et cetera.

I wish people would translate the Ten Commandments properly.

It's "Thou shall not murder" NOT "thou shall not kill." That mistranslation brings up so many problems. =\