Let's talk leaven...

There are many who would say that it is clear...a little leaven leaven's the lump---it permeates throughout. Meaning... a little error can permeate and change one's thinking and understanding. If one accepts the beliefs and doctrine of someone who is proven in error and contrary to Scripture, it stands to reason one needs to eliminate all they assimilated from them and then make sure that each thing they believe is actually Scripturally true.

Some are actually deciding a particular person --where they obtained major doctrine---is found to be false---yet they merely switch to another who has the same doctrines, without some particular noticed error. In other words, they have become permeated with the false doctrine and do not see that they are in error. They place the issue on the person's apparent and noticable hypocrisy's and falseness, instead of also on what they have promoted and they themselves have accepted as truth.

If a little leaven leaven's the whole lump...can a person hang onto the doctrine they have received from the false teacher? group? organisation? belief system?

(06-27-2009 12:06 PM)Strefanash Wrote:  what was the leaven of the pharisees?

It was hypocrisy. You yourself quoted this passage. It was not error per se, and why? as Jesus said "DO AS THEY SAY but not as they do."

If leaven is as you define it ie only propositional error I am to reject every teaching that I ever heard from every sinner, which is every teaching I ever heard, including yours, Vic, and my own.

For example, tongue speeking. The reactions I have heard against it here are emotive and unbiblical, indeed the reactions are so bad that I have given up responding to them.

That is the sober truth as to why I have been somewhat quiet lately

They tended to live a separate and distinct life. Zealous to the point of deifying the law, while rejecting Christ. Their religion became external, legalistic and formal, and missed the heart of knowing and loving God, desiring truth, righteousness, and the spirit of the law, and instead gave the outward appearance of religion but inwardly were "whited sepulchres."while they placed terrible burdens on their followers, while not doing those things themselves. (Mark 7:6-13; Luke 11:42-44, 53-54; 16:14-15) What they believed was fully contrary to what Christ taught and how He lived, which is why they were such bitter enemies of Him..

Believed the written law, but also the oral law, which for many was and is esteemed above the written. They were popular, and had extensive religious and political influence. They were filled with self righteousness, pride and covetousness, desiring the adoration of others and special privileges because of who they thought they were. They appeared moral, but failed miserably as many scriptures reveal in Jesus' rebuke and interactions with them. They imputed Christ's miracles to satan, and denied who He was.

Thankfully, as with the other groups some did come to believe Christ and serve Him.

Herod was descended from a family of Edomites - his mother was a Samaritan. Appointed by Rome, he was not a Jew but became ruler or king over the Jews, and made religion part of the state. It is reported that many Jews did not accept Herod as the legitimate king, because he was not from the lineage of David, and was appointed by Rome.

Herod the Great was the son of Antipater of Idumaea (Edom). Appointed king of Judaea B.C. 40. He is the one who commanded that all Jewish male children be killed after the birth of Christ. Since he was a descendant of Esau, and not of Jacob, then obviously he would not be defined as a “brother” by the standard of Torah.

Herod "Antipas", was the son of Herod the Great (Edomite) and Malthace (Samaritan) He cast John the Baptist into prison due to John's rebuke for his unlawful relationship with Herodias, his brothers wife. At her request, he ordered him beheaded. Probably not a “brother”.

Herod Agrippa I was the grandson of Herod the Great. I wonder if the scripture about the sins of the father and generations would apply here? His patri-lineal line was also from Edom. He also ordered that James son of Zebedee put to death, and for Peter to be cast into prison. Herod was worshiped as a god, stuck down and eaten by worms, and died. God's justice.

The Herodians were a court or political party mentioned in Matthew 22:16; Mark 12:13; Mark 3:6, as acting with the Pharisees in opposition to Jesus. They were not a religious sect, but supporters of the dynasty of Herod. They saw that what Christ taught was antagonistic and contrary to their interests, which is why they joined with the Pharisees to attempt to destroy Christ.

The Herodians were an attempted buffer between the Jews and paganism and their faith. They looked upon Herod and his successors as Messiah, meaning they were forerunner's of the antichrist and literally paved the way to apostasy by blending paganism and false gods with God and the law. They believed that it was a political necessity to support Herod or whatever the govt (Rome) regardless how unfaithful to God the government was. Not the necessary regard of all government, but the adulation and support for compromise of the Truth. They also esteemed Caesar as ruler to them...which God had forbidden Deu 17:15

They merged their Jewish beliefs with their compromising and unorthodox political and spiritual practices which gave them the common ground with both the Pharisees and Sadducees. They joined forces to find a way to destroy Christ. That is, the legal zealots, the Jewish politicians, supporters of the political and ruling dynasty, worked together to deal with Christ whose teachings contradicted their legalism and the temporary kingdoms of this world, in favor of His Spiritual kingdom, which lasts for all eternity.

(06-27-2009 10:56 AM)Vic Wrote:  If a little leaven leaven's the whole lump...can a person hang onto the doctrine they have received from the false teacher? group? organisation? belief system?[/b][/color]

(01-29-2010 12:20 PM)Scotchman Wrote:  

(06-27-2009 10:56 AM)Vic Wrote:  If a little leaven leaven's the whole lump...can a person hang onto the doctrine they have received from the false teacher? group? organisation? belief system?[/b][/color]

The Leaven was the DOCTRINE not the teachers.

And one false doctrine will corrupt other doctrine.

We need to filter our doctrine through Scripture.

Throw out the bad but remember even a broken clock is right sometimes.

Even Satan mixes truth and Error. He comes as an Angel of light.

Do not throw out Truth WITH the Error.

No in there right mind one would eat rotten fruit. We cut off the bad spots if we can. We try to save that which is still good.

We prune a Tree, we don't hack down one which is redeemable.

Luke 13:6-9 * He spake also this parable; A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none. * Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground? * And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it: * And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down.

It is what God did.
Romans 11:20-21 * Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: * For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.

Read the passage to see the context. He did not remove the whole tree and start over.

I Thank God.

(01-29-2010 10:57 PM)Scotchman Wrote:  Reread it then, you missed the point. LEAVEN AFFECTS YOUR FRUIT and THAT IS something which the Luke and Romans passages deal with.

I never cut off rotting bits of a food and consume the rest.I throw it away.If a food is rotting then the rest of the food is also contaminated by that point.Not safe,throw it away! Like with contaminated doctrines