The Bread of Life
Here is a sort of summary from our sermon today on the bread of Life - communion. The question being about the bread what kind of bread - leavened or unleavened. I found it pretty interesting. So here it goes:
the issue between leaven and no leaven was one issue involved in the East/West split (the Easterns called the Romans "azymites" or no leaveners roughly translated). The Greeks said they used leaven because of it fit with the joy they had. However, later at the Council of Florence, they said either form was accpetable.
So should be have a preference? Is one Biblical and one not? And further, which one should we use? Do these details even matter? Well God being the God of details cares about small things, so what he speaks about we need to listen to, what he is listen on we should be silent on. We are not to add or subtract from his word.
First off in this discussion we need to understand what is being talked about. When we are mentioning leaven, that is not the same thing as yeast. This is important. Leaven is basically sourdough, some sort of starter loaf for a previous batch that you use to get the next loaf to rise with. This is what most bread in the OT is talking about. there fore if you are talking about unleavened bread, one of the things that it symbolizes is a break from the past - you are not using part of the last loaf of bread, but are starting over brand new. Thus, when the Israelites left Eygpt, they were to use unleavened bread (Ex. 12:15) because they were to completely start over. The fact that they were using unleavened bread does not mean they were remembering their miserable state in Eygpt, but celebrating their new beginning. So unleavened bread is not about fluffy bread versus flat bread or some sort of cracker, but it is about a break from the past. What we use in communion is unleavened bread.
Now if we look at the Bible we can see how leaven was and was not used in Worship. First we looked at where unleavened bread was used and that was two main places: burnt grain offerings and the Passover. Ironically, the Lord's Supper is the new Passover, so obviously we should use unleavened right? Kind of a they did that then, so we should do it now arguement. Under the surface though we see two things that show this reasoning to be false. The Lord's Supper is not a duplication of the Passover meal (no roast lamb or bitter herbs, which would obviously be a wrong way to celebrate the Lord's supper) and the Last Supper was the Last passover meal. So after the last supper, we should celebrating something different, we are celebrating a kingdom supper.
Leavened bread is used in worship in several different places, the primary one being the Peace offering (where the worshipper communed at the table with God in peace). This would be fluffly bread and it would be fluffy for a reason. it takes time for bread to rise, thereby making it a rest food, a leisure food. Another place where leavened bread was used was at Pentecost (also known as the feast of weeks). During this feast the first fruits, the best were brought before God. Leavened bread fits in the first fruits category.
Now for some more on the symbolism of leavening. The first thing to keep in mind is that leaven does not mean sin. After all, it was used in worship as a good thing. Also, Christ used leaven in both positive and negative senses (the leaven of the pharisees Mt. 16:6, 12 & as a metaphor of the kingdom of heaven in Mt. 13:33). Secondly, leaven symbolizes a permeating influence. It symbolizes the influence of God's kingdom, maturity and growth, continuity, and prosperity.
Unleavened bread, on the other hand, is the bread of haste, the bread of breaking with the past. Thus with unleavened bread, we have the symbolism of breaking with sin and its influence (I Cor 5:6-8).
At this point, if you are like me, you are wondering so where does that leave us? Well, with the conclusion that both options have symbolism that is appropriate, albeit for different things. It is possible that at the Last supper, the leavened/unleavened designation attached to the Lord's supper went away (though we should always use fluffy bread). And so the season in the church calender should dictate the which bread is to be used. The symbolism of leavened is to be preferred at sometimes, whereas unleavened would be better at others.
Above all this however is that important fact that living out the symbolism is of an even greater level of importance. We are to be unleavened with sin, and to be leavening the world with the gospel. Isaiah, 19;19-22 speaks about God ridding the world of the yeast of satan. Now this next point is extremely important for all us who are younger: the work of yeast/leaven takes time. Be patient. Don't rush in, keep your integrity, and don't get ahead of God.
As postmil Christians this shouldn't be any problem. We have - literally - all the time in the world. All we need to do is be obedient in every area of life and to love the little things: our family, our jobs, our friends our neighbors, our church.
Thank God!
the issue between leaven and no leaven was one issue involved in the East/West split (the Easterns called the Romans "azymites" or no leaveners roughly translated). The Greeks said they used leaven because of it fit with the joy they had. However, later at the Council of Florence, they said either form was accpetable.
So should be have a preference? Is one Biblical and one not? And further, which one should we use? Do these details even matter? Well God being the God of details cares about small things, so what he speaks about we need to listen to, what he is listen on we should be silent on. We are not to add or subtract from his word.
First off in this discussion we need to understand what is being talked about. When we are mentioning leaven, that is not the same thing as yeast. This is important. Leaven is basically sourdough, some sort of starter loaf for a previous batch that you use to get the next loaf to rise with. This is what most bread in the OT is talking about. there fore if you are talking about unleavened bread, one of the things that it symbolizes is a break from the past - you are not using part of the last loaf of bread, but are starting over brand new. Thus, when the Israelites left Eygpt, they were to use unleavened bread (Ex. 12:15) because they were to completely start over. The fact that they were using unleavened bread does not mean they were remembering their miserable state in Eygpt, but celebrating their new beginning. So unleavened bread is not about fluffy bread versus flat bread or some sort of cracker, but it is about a break from the past. What we use in communion is unleavened bread.
Now if we look at the Bible we can see how leaven was and was not used in Worship. First we looked at where unleavened bread was used and that was two main places: burnt grain offerings and the Passover. Ironically, the Lord's Supper is the new Passover, so obviously we should use unleavened right? Kind of a they did that then, so we should do it now arguement. Under the surface though we see two things that show this reasoning to be false. The Lord's Supper is not a duplication of the Passover meal (no roast lamb or bitter herbs, which would obviously be a wrong way to celebrate the Lord's supper) and the Last Supper was the Last passover meal. So after the last supper, we should celebrating something different, we are celebrating a kingdom supper.
Leavened bread is used in worship in several different places, the primary one being the Peace offering (where the worshipper communed at the table with God in peace). This would be fluffly bread and it would be fluffy for a reason. it takes time for bread to rise, thereby making it a rest food, a leisure food. Another place where leavened bread was used was at Pentecost (also known as the feast of weeks). During this feast the first fruits, the best were brought before God. Leavened bread fits in the first fruits category.
Now for some more on the symbolism of leavening. The first thing to keep in mind is that leaven does not mean sin. After all, it was used in worship as a good thing. Also, Christ used leaven in both positive and negative senses (the leaven of the pharisees Mt. 16:6, 12 & as a metaphor of the kingdom of heaven in Mt. 13:33). Secondly, leaven symbolizes a permeating influence. It symbolizes the influence of God's kingdom, maturity and growth, continuity, and prosperity.
Unleavened bread, on the other hand, is the bread of haste, the bread of breaking with the past. Thus with unleavened bread, we have the symbolism of breaking with sin and its influence (I Cor 5:6-8).
At this point, if you are like me, you are wondering so where does that leave us? Well, with the conclusion that both options have symbolism that is appropriate, albeit for different things. It is possible that at the Last supper, the leavened/unleavened designation attached to the Lord's supper went away (though we should always use fluffy bread). And so the season in the church calender should dictate the which bread is to be used. The symbolism of leavened is to be preferred at sometimes, whereas unleavened would be better at others.
Above all this however is that important fact that living out the symbolism is of an even greater level of importance. We are to be unleavened with sin, and to be leavening the world with the gospel. Isaiah, 19;19-22 speaks about God ridding the world of the yeast of satan. Now this next point is extremely important for all us who are younger: the work of yeast/leaven takes time. Be patient. Don't rush in, keep your integrity, and don't get ahead of God.
As postmil Christians this shouldn't be any problem. We have - literally - all the time in the world. All we need to do is be obedient in every area of life and to love the little things: our family, our jobs, our friends our neighbors, our church.
Thank God!
posted by Charlie at 4:02 PM
2 Comments:
Interesting post, Charlie. The appropriateness of the elements used in the Lord's Supper is a discussion I've had with my dad before and, I must admit, my defense of using "fluffy" bread was less than satisfactory...to both of us I'm afraid. I was not aware that leavening and yeast were not synonymous. I must also confess my ignorance when it comes to baking...I'm happy to just put baked goods into my largest head hole. Is leavened bread still commonly made, or is most bread unleavened?
You noted that the they-did-it-this-way-so-we-should-do-it-this-way argument is false reasoning. Is justifying the use of wine with the same argument also false reasoning? (Maybe that's next week's sermon.)
Thanks for the post, you got me thinking.
There is such a thing as leavened bread - we know it by the name of sourdough. It comes from a starter chunk.
Regarding the wine, that was actually last weeks sermon. I will try to get those notes up sometime in the near future.
Post a Comment
<< Home