Dear Christian, You “Really Are” Unleavened
If you are really a Christian, you are unleavened. In the Bible, leaven is used to demonstrate an influence; sometimes the illustration regards evil and other times some sort of other influence. In 1Corithians 5:6-8, the influence spoken of is evil.
Even though Paul had written to the Corinthians before and emphasized the importance of not fellowshipping with those who lead unruly lives, apparently the message didn’t compute.
1Corinthians 5:6 – Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? 7 Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. 8 Let us therefore celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.
The point I want to make here in addition to the myriad of texts in the Bible that state Christians are righteous, not merely declared righteous, this text states that we “really are” unleavened. Paul often made statements like this to deliberately emphasize the fact that Christians are righteous beings, not simply labeled as such. In writing to the Romans and telling them of their goodness, he stated “you yourselves” are full of goodness.
Paul used the Passover feast, which included the Feast of Unleavened Bread to make his point.
In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month between the two evenings is the LORD’s Passover. And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the LORD; seven days ye shall eat unleavened bread. In the first day ye shall have a holy convocation; ye shall do no manner of servile work. And ye shall bring an offering made by fire unto the LORD seven days; in the seventh day is a holy convocation; ye shall do no manner of servile work (Leviticus 23:5-8 KVJ).
In this particular letter to the Corinthians, the Feast of Unleavened Bread is likened to Christian fellowship at least and probably sanctification in general. Both are to be done with “sincerity and truth.” Notice also that Passover was to be a day of rest indicating that the Lamb’s justifying work is complete, but our celebration of the feast looks forward to a rest at the end. The in-between, viz, sanctification, is NOT a rest. In fact, here is how the Passover meal was to be eaten:
Exodus 12:11 – In this manner you shall eat it: with your belt fastened, your sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hand. And you shall eat it in haste. It is the LORD’s Passover.
Lastly, the sanctification feast is to be maximized with purity. Obviously, if we are still leavened, Paul’s warning that “a little leaven leavens the whole lump” makes no sense at all. Why would we care about a little leaven if we are not an unleavened lump? Jesus issued the same warning in Matthew 5:19; those who relax the least of all commandments will be called least in the kingdom of heaven.
Sanctification is not a rest. Sanctification does not take a relaxed attitude towards sin. We are to continually separate our unleavened selves from the leaven of the world. We are NOT the leavened saved by grace.
paul
How Christians Change: Biblical Dynamics of Change in Sanctification
A Kinder, Gentler Approach to Tough Questions for Answers in Genesis: Introduction
Last week, this blog/ministry received more pushback in one week than all weeks put together since we launched in 2009. Also, a new crowd has shown up and made their disdain for us known: the Zane Hodges hyper-grace groupies. They can now get in line with the New Calvinists, Old Calvinists, Arminians, Anti-Lordship crowd, and discernment bloggers.
Indeed, in the midst of last week’s firestorm, I do take responsibility for the Ken Ham AIG post. I forget that this blog has been around for six years, and readers are not going to assume prior context. Basically, I have serious issues with Ken Ham that go back several years concerning a mutual acquaintance, and I am afraid that past bias provoked me to pull the trigger on that post without sufficient forethought.
If I would have to narrow this ministry down to one objective, it is to get people to think which at times results in frustration. I too-often forget what the readers are not seeing when I write a post, and that post lacked context on many levels, so it was pulled down.
With that said, I want to revisit the issues raised by the post in the right way. In part one, I concede that the lawsuit by AIG against the state of Kentucky is an issue of incentive and not subsidy (or a grant). In part one which is a pretty good three-way discussion at the Dayton Potter’s House, I explain my revised position on that. But what about the title? Do I really believe that Ken Ham wants a church state? No, but what we also discuss is the huge problem with the vast majority of American evangelicals believing that God’s kingdom is on earth, and how that assumption leads to de facto dominionism. This is why these lawsuits make me nervous.
Look, as I explain in part one, I was almost first in line with my family during the grand opening of the creation museum. But ironically, because of an individual associated with AIG, a person that I actually attended church with, I was forced to go on a journey, and that journey raises serious questions about the answers supposedly delivered by Ken Ham. In light of Ken Ham’s endorsement of Redemptive-Historical Hermeneutics, what is Ham’s true worldview?
In addition, should Christians be investing millions of dollars to prove that Noah built a boat when precious few understand the difference between justification and sanctification? Moreover, was it a boat or a box? And am I making a bigger deal out of that than I should? Perhaps.
You be the judge, but frankly, because of a worldview that Ham has endorsed on paper, perhaps unwittingly, I lost a big chunk of my life which God, by the way, has replaced abundantly, and for that I am thankful. Nevertheless, because of that experience, I have a tendency to take too few prisoners, and I sincerely appreciate those around me who are willing to inflict faithful wounds and not deceitful kisses.
The part one video is being processed. Part two will be next week. We will also discuss the common thread that is putting us at odds with so many: the distinction between justification and sanctification; and that issue’s impact on the gospel.
paul
leave a comment