I don't get this. Can you help?

[atwhatcost]

This is the verse I'm reading:

Lev 21:5 They [the priest of the tabernacle] shall not make baldness upon their head, neither shall they shave off the corner of their beard, nor make any cuttings in their flesh.

This is what Jamieson, Fassett and Brown's Commentary says:

They shall not make baldness upon their heads ... nor ... cuttings in their flesh — The superstitious marks of sorrow, as well as the violent excesses in which the heathen indulged at the death of their friends, were forbidden by a general law to the Hebrew people (Lev_19:28). But the priests were to be laid under a special injunction, not only that they might exhibit examples of piety in the moderation of their grief, but also by the restraint of their passions, be the better qualified to administer the consolations of religion to others, and show, by their faith in a blessed resurrection, the reasons for sorrowing not as those who have no hope.

I get making their heads bald or putting patterns in their hair and/or beard wasn't allowed. I get "cutting of flesh" is talking about tattoos or ritualistic scars. I'm missing "What superstitious marks of sorrow? Why sorrow and how sorrow? And what violent excesses in which the heathen indulged at the death of their friends? Like gang feuds? Doesn't seem the place for that in this verse. Or did the heathens do something weird (probably) when their friends died, like what we would call today self mutilation or cutting?"

These commentators keep talking like I'm supposed to know what the non-saved were doing back then, but, unless they out and out tell me, I've got no idea what the weirdo tradition of that day was to understand what they're talking about. Or maybe I'm just thick this morning, and any other day it would make sense to me.

Anyone up on this? Because they have me curious, but I have no idea how to find out what they're talking about.

 

[phil112]

Cutting. Print is tattoos..................

Leviticus 19:28 Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the Lord.

 

[atwhatcost]

Cutting. Print is tattoos..................

Leviticus 19:28 Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the Lord.

Right. Got that part, but was that a thing the heathens did back then when a loved one dies? (Ooooh, I so miss the person. Let me add a tattoo or let me cut myself.) We have to dig into the flesh whether it's a tattoo or a cut, so I figure the Israelites weren't supposed to do either. But is that what they mean by "mark of sorrow?" Is that the "violent excess?" Maybe I don't think it's either, because so many get tats when they aren't sorrowful. They're kind of happy about it.

 

[oldhermit]

Right. Got that part, but was that a thing the heathens did back then when a loved one dies? (Ooooh, I so miss the person. Let me add a tattoo or let me cut myself.) We have to dig into the flesh whether it's a tattoo or a cut, so I figure the Israelites weren't supposed to do either. But is that what they mean by "mark of sorrow?" Is that the "violent excess?" Maybe I don't think it's either, because so many get tats when they aren't sorrowful. They're kind of happy about it.

This is basically represented in two parts. One, they were not to perform acts of mutilation on their bodies for any reason. This was considered a defilement. Two, they were not permitted to grieve for the loss of a loved one in the same way the heathens did. They were to represent death in a much different way than those who worshiped false Gods.

 

[phil112]

Right. Got that part, but was that a thing the heathens did back then when a loved one dies? (Ooooh, I so miss the person. Let me add a tattoo or let me cut myself.) We have to dig into the flesh whether it's a tattoo or a cut, so I figure the Israelites weren't supposed to do either. But is that what they mean by "mark of sorrow?" Is that the "violent excess?" Maybe I don't think it's either, because so many get tats when they aren't sorrowful. They're kind of happy about it.

Cutting is blood letting. Tattoo is marking the skin. It isn't even close to being the same. The only thing in common is, as OldHermit noted, both are defiling the body, which for a Christian is God's temple.
God never wants His temple defiled in any way, shape, or form.

 

[MarcR]

This is the verse I'm reading:


This is what Jamieson, Fassett and Brown's Commentary says:



I get making their heads bald or putting patterns in their hair and/or beard wasn't allowed. I get "cutting of flesh" is talking about tattoos or ritualistic scars. I'm missing "What superstitious marks of sorrow? Why sorrow and how sorrow? And what violent excesses in which the heathen indulged at the death of their friends? Like gang feuds? Doesn't seem the place for that in this verse. Or did the heathens do something weird (probably) when their friends died, like what we would call today self mutilation or cutting?"

These commentators keep talking like I'm supposed to know what the non-saved were doing back then, but, unless they out and out tell me, I've got no idea what the weirdo tradition of that day was to understand what they're talking about. Or maybe I'm just thick this morning, and any other day it would make sense to me.

Anyone up on this? Because they have me curious, but I have no idea how to find out what they're talking about.

These mourning practises were part of the Baal worship of the Moabites and the Amonites. Lev 21:5 is one of many specific warnings against the idolatrous practices of Israel's neighbors. They are given to warn against getting sucked into idolatry by a seemingly unrelated practice.

 

[atwhatcost]

Cutting is blood letting. Tattoo is marking the skin. It isn't even close to being the same. The only thing in common is, as OldHermit noted, both are defiling the body, which for a Christian is God's temple.
God never wants His temple defiled in any way, shape, or form.

These folks don't seem to be doing it to let out blood.

 

[valiant]

This is the verse I'm reading:


This is what Jamieson, Fassett and Brown's Commentary says:



I get making their heads bald or putting patterns in their hair and/or beard wasn't allowed. I get "cutting of flesh" is talking about tattoos or ritualistic scars. I'm missing "What superstitious marks of sorrow? Why sorrow and how sorrow? And what violent excesses in which the heathen indulged at the death of their friends? Like gang feuds? Doesn't seem the place for that in this verse. Or did the heathens do something weird (probably) when their friends died, like what we would call today self mutilation or cutting?"

These commentators keep talking like I'm supposed to know what the non-saved were doing back then, but, unless they out and out tell me, I've got no idea what the weirdo tradition of that day was to understand what they're talking about. Or maybe I'm just thick this morning, and any other day it would make sense to me.

Anyone up on this? Because they have me curious, but I have no idea how to find out what they're talking about.

These were Canaanite practises. when the Canaanite prophets opposed Elijah they cut themselves in order to persuade Baal to hear them (1 Kings 18.28).

Furthermore priests had to be without blemish. if they made themselves bald, and cut their hair as described and cut themselves they would no longer be unblemished.

 

[atwhatcost]

These mourning practises were part of the Baal worship of the Moabites and the Amonites. Lev 21:5 is one of many specific warnings against the idolatrous practices of Israel's neighbors. They are given to warn against getting sucked into idolatry by a seemingly unrelated practice.

So far, I've learned Baal worshipers had their kids go through fire to show Baal they're giving their kids over to him/her/it. There's some debate, if the kids were tossed into the fire, or had to walk in-between or on fire, but lived. Any idea how I can learn more about the Baal worshiping to see how this relates? Honestly, since I've seen too much on the Internet changed to fit a preconceived PCism, I no longer trust it to give me unbiased info, so I'd prefer books on the subject, if you know any.

 

[atwhatcost]

This is basically represented in two parts. One, they were not to perform acts of mutilation on their bodies for any reason. This was considered a defilement. Two, they were not permitted to grieve for the loss of a loved one in the same way the heathens did. They were to represent death in a much different way than those who worshiped false Gods.

Yeah, but what in the world were the heathens doing back then? That's where I'm stuck. It seems so far removed from life today, and I know God was doing that, (showing his people not to act like that), so I'd like to see a clearer picture of what stupidity the heathens were doing way back when.

 

[atwhatcost]

These were Canaanite practises. when the Canaanite prophets opposed Elijah they cut themselves in order to persuade Baal to hear them (1 Kings 18.28).

Furthermore priests had to be without blemish. if they made themselves bald, and cut their hair as described and cut themselves they would no longer be unblemished.

Wow. Any chance you remember where you learned that? That kind of thing seems to be what I'm looking for. (And, I know you might not remember. People often ask me where I learned something I learned years ago. No photographic memory, so I rarely remember where I learned it. lol)

 

[passing_through]

Cutting. Print is tattoos..................

Leviticus 19:28 Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the Lord.

Hi, Mr. Phil.

You use a modern version, am I right? I am of the opinion that 'cutting' is accurate.

And atwhatcost, where did you get that word 'Patterns' (in their hairs) unless a modern version.

Y'all go astray in your corrupt text, but go ahead.

 

[oldhermit]

Yeah, but what in the world were the heathens doing back then? That's where I'm stuck. It seems so far removed from life today, and I know God was doing that, (showing his people not to act like that), so I'd like to see a clearer picture of what stupidity the heathens were doing way back when.

I see. That is not an area that I am that well versed in. I have not spent much time in studying ancient pagan death rituals. What they were doing or why they were doing it really does not have much bearing on the prohibitions God had given Israel in this matter. You can boil it down to one simple fact. They were not to do the things because God said so and the reasons may belong God alone.

 

[Willie-T]

This is the verse I'm reading:


This is what Jamieson, Fassett and Brown's Commentary says:



I get making their heads bald or putting patterns in their hair and/or beard wasn't allowed. I get "cutting of flesh" is talking about tattoos or ritualistic scars. I'm missing "What superstitious marks of sorrow? Why sorrow and how sorrow? And what violent excesses in which the heathen indulged at the death of their friends? Like gang feuds? Doesn't seem the place for that in this verse. Or did the heathens do something weird (probably) when their friends died, like what we would call today self mutilation or cutting?"

These commentators keep talking like I'm supposed to know what the non-saved were doing back then, but, unless they out and out tell me, I've got no idea what the weirdo tradition of that day was to understand what they're talking about. Or maybe I'm just thick this morning, and any other day it would make sense to me.

Anyone up on this? Because they have me curious, but I have no idea how to find out what they're talking about.

I will say this one thing. You are wiser than most in realizing we cannot just arbitrarily interpret a book that was written to people whom we are not, by our cultural views of the 21st century. Yes, learn what was written to those people for their time and understanding.

We, so often, foolishly think the Bible was written TO us. It was not.

 

[atwhatcost]

Hi, Mr. Phil.

You use a modern version, am I right? I am of the opinion that 'cutting' is accurate.

And atwhatcost, where did you get that word 'Patterns' (in their hairs) unless a modern version.

Y'all go astray in your corrupt text, but go ahead.

I've got corrupt text? Eeeek!!!! Is that contagious?

Ummm, it can't be corrupt text if text doesn't out and out say it. I'm getting the pattern thingy from stuff I read to go along with The Law. For instance, Egyptians were into baldies, except for one patch in the back(ish) where they let that hair grow forever. (Think of the braids on Obi-Wan and Anakin when they were still students, but cut off the rest of the hair as an image. And, I don't think the Egyptians braided, but I didn't study that much of their culture to rule it out.) They also had rectangle beards, of sorts. The Greek (or maybe the Romans, I tend to forget which culture but around that area and possibly a little later) priest shaved off all their hair -- head and body -- every three days to prove their pureness. Those kinds of weirdo patterns.

 

[atwhatcost]

I see. That is not an area that I am that well versed in. I have not spent much time in studying ancient pagan death rituals. What they were doing or why they were doing it really does not have much bearing on the prohibitions God had given Israel in this matter. You can boil it down to one simple fact. They were not to do the things because God said so and the reasons may belong God alone.

Actually it does. Much of these specific laws combat the brain-dead notions the Israelites picked up while being slaves in Egypt. They tended towards copying the religion they grew up in, and God was setting them apart from it. Kind of the reason I'm curious of what was going on. I figure if they were going with brain-dead superstitions because they were around those people too much, what am I falling for now, because it hasn't dawned on me the effects of society. I've already caught myself wanting to keep superstitions to get my Philadelphia Eagles to win more often, so have to fight that urge. What am I not noticing that's just plain brain-dead too? lol

Did you know every single one of those ten plagues proves ten different Egyptian gods weren't gods or real? Can you imagine living in a word where frog statues and insect statues really meant something to people, but they can't/shouldn't mean anything to you? Being American, it's not too hard for me. I'm a sports fan. Swoop and the Phillies Phanatic are part of our culture. I just have to make sure I remember there is an over heated, uncomfortable guy in their trying to charge up the fans, instead of it meaning anything if he happens to raise his arm right before we score a few times in a row.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

So far, I've learned Baal worshipers had their kids go through fire to show Baal they're giving their kids over to him/her/it. There's some debate, if the kids were tossed into the fire, or had to walk in-between or on fire, but lived. Any idea how I can learn more about the Baal worshiping to see how this relates? Honestly, since I've seen too much on the Internet changed to fit a preconceived PCism, I no longer trust it to give me unbiased info, so I'd prefer books on the subject, if you know any.

This one isn't PC: Baalbek Temple and Human Sacrifice worship to Baal.

 

[MarcR]

So far, I've learned Baal worshipers had their kids go through fire to show Baal they're giving their kids over to him/her/it. There's some debate, if the kids were tossed into the fire, or had to walk in-between or on fire, but lived. Any idea how I can learn more about the Baal worshiping to see how this relates? Honestly, since I've seen too much on the Internet changed to fit a preconceived PCism, I no longer trust it to give me unbiased info, so I'd prefer books on the subject, if you know any.

To the best of my knowledge, children passing through the fire was associated with Chemosh rather than Baal.

as I understand what was done: A large hot fire was built in a narrow trench and children would thoroughly wet themselves in water and leap through the fire totally nude. Usually they were unharmed; but some stumbled and were severely burnt or died.

 

[oldhermit]

Actually it does. Much of these specific laws combat the brain-dead notions the Israelites picked up while being slaves in Egypt. They tended towards copying the religion they grew up in, and God was setting them apart from it. Kind of the reason I'm curious of what was going on. I figure if they were going with brain-dead superstitions because they were around those people too much, what am I falling for now, because it hasn't dawned on me the effects of society. I've already caught myself wanting to keep superstitions to get my Philadelphia Eagles to win more often, so have to fight that urge. What am I not noticing that's just plain brain-dead too? lol

Did you know every single one of those ten plagues proves ten different Egyptian gods weren't gods or real? Can you imagine living in a word where frog statues and insect statues really meant something to people, but they can't/shouldn't mean anything to you? Being American, it's not too hard for me. I'm a sports fan. Swoop and the Phillies Phanatic are part of our culture. I just have to make sure I remember there is an over heated, uncomfortable guy in their trying to charge up the fans, instead of it meaning anything if he happens to raise his arm right before we score a few times in a row.

I see. Yes, I am aware of all of this. So what you are trying to ascertain from this example is what eternal truths one can generalize from these prohibitions. This is always a valid approach to any text of scripture.

 

[Jeff_56]

it is so sad, great sorrow, for someone to think that yahweh has not spoken to them by His WORD.

man does not live by bread alone, but by EVERY WORD that proceeds from the mouth of yahweh.

HIS WORD, TORAH, is directly to and for us who love HIM , who are called according to HIS PURPOSE.

EVERY WORD is profitable (TORAH flowing to us, HIS CHILDREN) for LIFE, UNDERSTANDING, WISDOM, above all TRUTH and LOVE.