Manna from Heaven

[Beck]

According to Exodus 16:32-34 "And Moses said, This is the thing which the LORD commandeth, Fill an omer of it to be kept for your generations; that they may see the bread wherewith I have fed you in the wilderness, when I brought you forth from the land of Egypt. 33And Moses said unto Aaron, Take a pot, and put an omer full of manna therein, and lay it up before the LORD, to be kept for your generations. 34As the LORD commanded Moses, so Aaron laid it up before the Testimony, to be kept."


Here we have the story of Aaron taking a omer of manna and placing it into a pot (jar) to be keep before the Testimony. In my understanding this Testimony is the Ark of the covenant where also Aaron's shaff and the Two tables are to be keep in the Holy Place.

Yet the given of the manna was to be allocated for only one day with the exception of the sixth day being given an double portion for the seventh day. Therefore the shining of the sun would cause the manna to melt.

My thought is what is in the jar then? Would it had turned to some type of liquid? A better question would be can we read these passges and except them as being literal food from the heavens?


I do see the comparison of the manna to that of the bread of life that Jesus gave and which should be keep in jars of clay.


John 6:35-38, 48-51
35And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
36But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.
37All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
38For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.

48I am that bread of life.
49Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead.
50This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.
51I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.



So another question is should we see that the manna was indeed real bread from heaven?

[Beck]

Hey Guys I was wanting to know the agruments for claiming that the Manna from heaven is real vs non-real. If you can give any insight into either direction, much thanks.

[David M]

[QUOTE=Beck;41364]According to Exodus 16:32-34 "And Moses said, This is the thing which the LORD commandeth, Fill an omer of it to be kept for your generations; that they may see the bread wherewith I have fed you in the wilderness, when I brought you forth from the land of Egypt. 33And Moses said unto Aaron, Take a pot, and put an omer full of manna therein, and lay it up before the LORD, to be kept for your generations. 34As the LORD commanded Moses, so Aaron laid it up before the Testimony, to be kept."

Hello Beck

The question you pose about the manna kept in the vessel placed in the ark is a hypothetical question and we cannot possibly know the answer. However much we speculate about this, it does not alter our belief about the events that took place.

It is amazing (miraculous) that God supplied manna to the Children of Israel in the wilderness for forty years according to the principles laid down.
Under normal conditions the manna remained edible for around 12 hours and if it was kept to the following morning it began to stink and breed worms making it inedible. On the day that two portions were collected the manna held over to the Sabbath day was to be baked.

Each day it was a miracle to find the manna on the ground in the morning and however much each person collected, when measured out using the omer each person had just the right amount to meet their hunger needs for that day.

The record does tell us that the manna melted under the heat of the sun.

Concerning the manna put in the pot placed in the ark, we might assume the manna was baked otherwise it would have stank and bred worms. It is not stated that the manna put in the pot had to be baked.

Once the pot was placed in the ark, I am assuming the contents of the pot were never examined and that the lid remained on the pot and the lid formed an air-tight seal. Whether the contents decayed or not we shall never know. I can only assume also if God wanted the contents to remain fresh he would have ensured they stayed fresh. I can imagine that if the contents had rotted, no one would have known. The contents could have ended up as a pile of dirt after the contents decayed and the worms that would have bred also died and decayed to dust. This is what happens to a body that reverts to dust after it has decayed and been eaten by worms in the coffin in which the body has been placed.

The provision of manna is another of God’s miracles that we have to accept on the basis of the information we are given. It is another of the miracles God performed for the Children of Israel in the same way as the soles of their shoes never wore out in the forty years the people wandered in the wilderness.

I have no doubt about the provision of manna being true. If Jesus spoke about the manna provided in the wilderness and compared this to the true bread of life that God had provided in His Son, that is good enough for me.

David

[duxrow]

:yo: http://www.cswnet.com/~duxrow/webdoc4.htm argues for manna being the "type" as well as bread being a figure of speech. :thumb:

[David M]

:yo: http://www.cswnet.com/~duxrow/webdoc4.htm argues for manna being the "type" as well as bread being a figure of speech. :thumb:


Thanks for the link. I extracted the following off the website.


Nobody told them that the manna was a pre-figure of Jesus, the true-bread to come, because the name of Jesus was a secret (hidden) in the Old Testament. ("Wonderful" translates as "secret" in Hebrew: Judg13:18/Isa9:6).

I do no want to start another thread on the nature of Jesus as I have a thread going already. The OT has lots of pointers and parallels and types relating to Jesus, but I cannot understand why it is throught Jesus was alive and part of the Godhead in Heaven. Why did God wait for thousands of years before He begat His Son born of a woman? What was Jesus doing in the prescence of God if he pre existed as claimed?

We know Jesus is active in Heaven now acting as our mediator. We also know Jesus has a role when he returns to the earth to set up the kingdom to come. We know he was doing His Father's will while on earth, but I cannot find the evidence of Jesus doing anything before he was born which is when Jesus came into being.

It might be better to give your answer to this in my thread; 'Jesus is not God'. Doing this will keep us on topic here.

[Beck]

Hello Beck

The question you pose about the manna kept in the vessel placed in the ark is a hypothetical question and we cannot possibly know the answer. However much we speculate about this, it does not alter our belief about the events that took place.

Hello David M,

I would agree on much speculation, but I at least wanted to know how other felt about this topic. Although I'm not sure if it wouldn't alter our belief to some degree if one came to the conclusion that the manna wasn't real.



It is amazing (miraculous) that God supplied manna to the Children of Israel in the wilderness for forty years according to the principles laid down.
Under normal conditions the manna remained edible for around 12 hours and if it was kept to the following morning it began to stink and breed worms making it inedible. On the day that two portions were collected the manna held over to the Sabbath day was to be baked.

Each day it was a miracle to find the manna on the ground in the morning and however much each person collected, when measured out using the omer each person had just the right amount to meet their hunger needs for that day.

The record does tell us that the manna melted under the heat of the sun.

Concerning the manna put in the pot placed in the ark, we might assume the manna was baked otherwise it would have stank and bred worms. It is not stated that the manna put in the pot had to be baked.

You bring up that it might have been baked, which is saying that it was some type of bread maked from grain. At least that is how Jesus compared manna of that day to the bread that he was offering. That does offer an explanation and considering that Moses told Aaron to put a omer into a jar. This omer is of course referred to the amount of Barley grain that is to be gathered as the first fruits and offered to God.

We might also look into the spiritual aspects of this as the first fruits unto salvation having the bread of life placed in jars of clay.



Once the pot was placed in the ark, I am assuming the contents of the pot were never examined and that the lid remained on the pot and the lid formed an air-tight seal. Whether the contents decayed or not we shall never know. I can only assume also if God wanted the contents to remain fresh he would have ensured they stayed fresh. I can imagine that if the contents had rotted, no one would have known. The contents could have ended up as a pile of dirt after the contents decayed and the worms that would have bred also died and decayed to dust. This is what happens to a body that reverts to dust after it has decayed and been eaten by worms in the coffin in which the body has been placed.

I believe the purpose was to keep the 'Testimony' here the Ark of the covenant and it contents in the Most Holy place until a time in which the High Priest would enter and reveal the contents to the people as an Testimony as to God's provisions of his people in the wildreness. Therefore bring out that jar and letting the people see the Testimony.




The provision of manna is another of God’s miracles that we have to accept on the basis of the information we are given. It is another of the miracles God performed for the Children of Israel in the same way as the soles of their shoes never wore out in the forty years the people wandered in the wilderness.

I have no doubt about the provision of manna being true. If Jesus spoke about the manna provided in the wilderness and compared this to the true bread of life that God had provided in His Son, that is good enough for me.

David

If real this heavenly food could possibly be some type of wild grain in which the people of Israel would gather per household. Saying that God had provided their daily bread which as indicated as coming from God from heaven.

[Beck]

There seem to be a parallel in the language used for 'Manna' as to how Jesus spoke of that heavenly food that was given to their father's in the wilderness the one that provided for the flesh therefore unable to provide for the spirit and soul of man.




John 6:26-36: 49-52
Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.
27Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.
28Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?
29Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
30They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work?
31Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.
32Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.
33For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.
34Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread.
35And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
36But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.


49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead.
50This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.
51I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.
52The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?




Jesus said that they are dead that ate of that manna in the wilderness. I have some thoughts to come out of this and I would like to see if you see some of these same parallels.

Lets consider that Jesus is telling of two different types of manna. The first manna from heaven is given to provide for their flesh which is unable to provide for their souls. While it is easy to see that Jesus used 'bread' in a figrative and metaphorical way to teach of his given of the words of God as living bread toward the soul of man. Opposite of that bread that was given in the wilderness as manna for the flesh. Jesus even said that the bread that he gives is of his flesh and body and of course we don't read that to be eating his flesh literally, but in the figurative sence of the covenant by his blood and body.

Lets then draw some parallels from these Two Covenant's of Manna.

A.) We have the Manna which provided for the flesh by it's Laws and Oblations in the Wilderness. Which feed the people for Sixth days and on the Sabbath rested. This manna (Law) was weak in that it only provided for the flesh and not the spirit seen by the weakness of the law. (Romans 8:3) This Manna (word fo God) brought condemnation and death, by the wages of sin therefore the people are dead in there sins.

B.)We now have Manna (God's word) from the True Manna from heaven which brings life and not death. We no longer are held in bondage to the Laws and Oblations for Christ is our Sabbath. Were the first covenant was weak in that it could only condemn and not bring justifcation. This True Manna provides for the soul and spirit of man and brings life.

So I would conclude that both of the represents of manna is that of 'God's word' which came to the people of Israel as the Laws of God. Likewise the teaches of Jesus is the word of God to the people of Israel as bread. It would seem that Jesus is using 'God's Word' as an heaven food in both cases and we shouldn't take the story of the wandering in the wilderness as God providing supernaturally food or bread from heaven each day.

[David M]

There seem to be a parallel in the language used for 'Manna' as to how Jesus spoke of that heavenly food that was given to their father's in the wilderness the one that provided for the flesh therefore unable to provide for the spirit and soul of man.


Hello Beck

I am a fairly simple guy so like to keep things simple. I take it that Jesus was simply comparing the phyiscal bread that came down from heaven(in other words, God provided it) and the spiritual bread that came down from heaven (in that God provided Jesus).

The Manna in the wilderness sustained the people in the wilderness and Jesus is simply saying they have died and are dead, pesumably many will not be raised from the dead, hence they remain dead.

Eating of the bread of life which Jesus represented, does not sustain us physically as natural food does, but the spiritual food if we feed on it is able to keep us alive. Even though we die, having partaken of the spiritual food in the right way, will keep us alive through the resurrection.

It is important to remember what Jesus asked his disciples to do and I follow after the practice of the disciples which they continued after Jesus left them. Let's consider what Jesus had to say about this spiritual heavenly bread.

Mar 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
Jesus is simply telling us that natural food while it sustains us will not keep us alive indefinitely, it is inevitable we shall at some point die, the but is saying the opposite, it does not have to be like that, the words that come out of the mouth of God (which Jesus said he had told his disciples all that he heard) are words, which if we take into our minds, feed our spirit, the influence that will have on us will be enough to give us life in the resurrection to come because Jesus will see that we have followed his example and commands.

Mar 6:11 Give us this day our daily bread. Jesus included in his prayer a request that God should continue to provide for our daily needs of which food is an essential. This request you will note comes after the two preceding priorities. The first to hallow God's name and second to pray for the kingdom to Come in which God's will be done.

Mat 26:26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. This was important to Jesus that his disciples share the passover feast with him and at the time Jeus took bread and wine and blessed them and of the bread he told them to eat of if for it represented his body. The bread is not a literally his body, the bread is a symbol.
Jesus wanted his disciples to rememeber him by doing this frequently as they could. Luke 22:19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.

The following is of interest when Jesus talked with two disciples unaware that it was Jesus risen from the dead.
Luke 24:30 And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. 31 And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.
From the moment Jesus took the bread their eyes were opened. What was it that made them realize it was Jesus? Was it the marks in his wrists or was it because of the act of sharing bread? What we can say is that where they were spiritually blind, their spiritual eyes were opened.

This is why I think remembering Jesus in the way he appointed is necessary. Some choose not to do it and it could be a form of spiritual blindness but I maintain it is important to do it; if Jesus requested to be remembered by taking bread and wine that is good enough for me.

John's Gospel is by far the deepest spiritually of the four gospel writers.
John 6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. We cannot physically eat of the flesh of Jesus but we can eat of the spiritual body of Jesus as represented in the body. If we do not want to remember Jesus in this way, I put it on a par with not being baptised. To reject baptism which Jesus told us it was necessary to do, not wanting to remember Jesus by sharing bread and wine with other believers is rebelling in the spirit. I know others will object to me saying this, but I am saying that I see it as necessary.

Even the Apostle Paul writes about partaking of the bread and wine and how important it is; 1 Cor 11
23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come.
27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.


How can we eat the flesh of the Son of Man? The answer is in the partaking of the bread and wine in memory of him.
John 6:53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Like baptism which is an outward sign of an inward belief that you have done in front of witnesses, so the partaking of bread and wine is shared with like-minded believers and in so doing is witnessed by others.

The practice to take bread and wine in memory of Jesus was done on the first day of the week Acts 20:7 And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, Clearly we see the disciples practicing it and the Apostle Paul was amongst them.

This has turned out to be a long reply, but for me this explains why we can regard Jesus as the bread that came down from heaven in that God provided him and it is upon Jesus we spiritually feed on him putting into practice the commands of God and feeding on the words (spiritual food) that have come from God via His Son.

David

[duxrow]

You write: How can we eat the flesh of the Son of Man? The answer is in the partaking of the bread and wine in memory of him.

Maybe helps to recognize Christ as the Passover Lamb which they were instructed to "eat ALL of it". But maybe nobody else was thinking "even the bony and disgusting parts"?

On the other hand, when eating food is compared to reading the Word, our Lamb of God tastes delicious to me! :thumb:

[Bob May]

Hey Guys I was wanting to know the agruments for claiming that the Manna from heaven is real vs non-real. If you can give any insight into either direction, much thanks.

Yes, it's real. It's Jesus. When I was a boy back in 64 there was a huge media blitz that preceded the Beatles coming to America. For weeks or months before their appearance on the Ed Sullivan Show on nation wide telivision I remember adds in the newspapers that showed images of the beatles haircuts with the words The Beatle Are Coming! The advertisements were real, but if you are too young to remeber, yu will have to take my word (or someone elses) on it. The importance of those advertisements fell by the wayside after the Beatles actually came. And when I read thpose adds in the papers I had no idea what they meant. Bob

[duxrow]

:yo: WAS real - past tense - except for what's in the pot, if we could locate...

Heb:9:4: Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid
round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's
rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant..

Ex:16:18: And when they did mete it with an omer, he that gathered much had
nothing over, and he that gathered little had no lack; they gathered every
man according to his eating.
Ex:16:19: And Moses said, Let no man leave of it till the morning.
Ex:16:20: Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto Moses; but some of them
left of it until the morning, and it bred worms, and stank: and Moses was wroth
with them.
Ex:16:21: And they gathered it every morning, every man according to his eating:
and when the sun waxed hot, it melted.
The manna was a PRECEPT and analogy, but with differences to Jesus the Living Bread.
"They were a teacher to lead us to Christ" Gal 3:24 Amen? :thumb:

[Bob May]

:yo: WAS real - past tense - except for what's in the pot, if we could locate...

Heb:9:4: Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid
round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's
rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant..

Ex:16:18: And when they did mete it with an omer, he that gathered much had
nothing over, and he that gathered little had no lack; they gathered every
man according to his eating.
Ex:16:19: And Moses said, Let no man leave of it till the morning.
Ex:16:20: Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto Moses; but some of them
left of it until the morning, and it bred worms, and stank: and Moses was wroth
with them.
Ex:16:21: And they gathered it every morning, every man according to his eating:
and when the sun waxed hot, it melted.
The manna was a PRECEPT and analogy, but with differences to Jesus the Living Bread.
"They were a teacher to lead us to Christ" Gal 3:24 Amen? :thumb:

But he said I am the bread of life. Not I was the bread of life! Bob

[duxrow]

Was referring to the Manna -- not to Jesus, who is and for my money always will.. The Son and Seed and Word of God is also the Bread which nourishes us spiritually. Doncha just love all those metaphors?
Gotta go now--more tomorrow maybe. :signthankspin:

[Beck]

Hello Beck

I am a fairly simple guy so like to keep things simple. I take it that Jesus was simply comparing the phyiscal bread that came down from heaven(in other words, God provided it) and the spiritual bread that came down from heaven (in that God provided Jesus).

The Manna in the wilderness sustained the people in the wilderness and Jesus is simply saying they have died and are dead, pesumably many will not be raised from the dead, hence they remain dead.


Greeting David,

That is what looks to be revealed of this first manna from heaven of an physical bread that one ate for the physical body, but in my studing this manna seem to be more toward the 'word of God' given out to those in the wilderness. That word of God is the commandments that where given to Moses. This manna was one of the flesh which Paul spoke was weak in that it was only for the flesh referring to the Law.(Romans 8)


In connection Paul spoke of one bread (loaf) and one body that we are all partakes of that one bread in Christ (1 Cor.10:17). The way that Paul described the body of death (Romans 7:24) is one that related to the Law of sin and death which also relates to bread. That is one reason Paul used 'Body' in the new testament is becasue there was a body of death in the old testament which isn't referring to the physical body, but the old covenant of death.

THE OLD COVENANT
BODY OF FLESH

BREAD OF THE FLESH

BODY OF DEATH


THE NEW COVENANT
BODY OF CHRIST

BREAD OF THE SPIRIT

BREAD OF LIFE


Paul's use of 'body' in 2 Cor. 5 has nothing to do with an individual's personal status after death – then or now, but everything to do with that 'corporate body' of the old covenant Israel.

It would also be my understanding that the writtings concerning Jesus and the miracle of the feeding the multitudes of full of symbolism referring to Israel. Which Jesus indicated they were seeking for bread and said unto them that he was the bread of life.

So I wouldn't just simply read, but should use spiritual discernment becasue there was an body in the old testament which was that body (covenant) of death, Likewise in the new testament a body of life. That old covenant of flesh was given the laws of God as the words or commandments of God. Therefore I come to understand when 'manna' is spoke of in the old testament it's not denoting something physical to eat, but to eat the words of God much in the same way Ezekiel and John was told to eat the book which was sweet and then bitter in their belly.

[Beck]

Yes, it's real. It's Jesus. When I was a boy back in 64 there was a huge media blitz that preceded the Beatles coming to America. For weeks or months before their appearance on the Ed Sullivan Show on nation wide telivision I remember adds in the newspapers that showed images of the beatles haircuts with the words The Beatle Are Coming! The advertisements were real, but if you are too young to remeber, yu will have to take my word (or someone elses) on it. The importance of those advertisements fell by the wayside after the Beatles actually came. And when I read thpose adds in the papers I had no idea what they meant. Bob

Hi Bob,

If you are responsing to the True Manna then Yes I totally agree that it was Jesus, but what I was asking was toward the old testament manna. The story just seems to supernatural to me to believe and while looking for an answer I started to notice that Jesus and his disciples and even Paul spoke of bread to which denotes the both covenants. The old covenant is spoken of as Bread, Death, Flesh which all refer to the fleshness of the law and not the physical body of man.

[David M]

Hello Bob

[cannot remember why I inserted quote, so have removed]

[edit] It is good we can see the spiritual lessons from these events and that is why the Bible is such a rich book and divinely inspired.

I think somteimes we can try to read too much into a verse. I have read comments on this forum to say that the whole of the Old Testament is an allegory. I think that is stretching allegory too much. The Old Testament is very important. Just this Sunday, I heard it said that the New Testament is a divine commentary on the Old Testament. You cannot take the New Testament in isolation from the Old Testament.

As long as we are on the same page that is good. We should recognize where we might be stretching a point too far, but the more we can see these associations aright, the better we are for it.


David

[Beck]

Hello Bob



I totally agree with you. It is good we can see the spiritual lessons from these events and that is why the Bible is such a rich book and divinely inspired.

I think somteimes we can try to read too much into a verse. I have read comments on this forum to say that the whole of the Old Testament is an allegory. I think that is stretching allegory too much. The Old Testament is very important. Just this Sunday, I heard it said that the New Testament is a divine commentary on the Old Testament. You cannot take the New Testament in isolation from the Old Testament.

As long as we are on the same page that is good. We should recognize where we might be stretching a point too far, but the more we can see these associations aright, the better we are for it.


David

David, you quoted my comments so are you agreeing with me or responsing to Bob?

[Bob May]

Greeting David,

That is what looks to be revealed of this first manna from heaven of an physical bread that one ate for the physical body, but in my studing this manna seem to be more toward the 'word of God' given out to those in the wilderness. That word of God is the commandments that where given to Moses. This manna was one of the flesh which Paul spoke was weak in that it was only for the flesh referring to the Law.(Romans 8)


In connection Paul spoke of one bread (loaf) and one body that we are all partakes of that one bread in Christ (1 Cor.10:17). The way that Paul described the body of death (Romans 7:24) is one that related to the Law of sin and death which also relates to bread. That is one reason Paul used 'Body' in the new testament is becasue there was a body of death in the old testament which isn't referring to the physical body, but the old covenant of death.

THE OLD COVENANT
BODY OF FLESH

BREAD OF THE FLESH

BODY OF DEATH


THE NEW COVENANT
BODY OF CHRIST

BREAD OF THE SPIRIT

BREAD OF LIFE


Paul's use of 'body' in 2 Cor. 5 has nothing to do with an individual's personal status after death – then or now, but everything to do with that 'corporate body' of the old covenant Israel.

It would also be my understanding that the writtings concerning Jesus and the miracle of the feeding the multitudes of full of symbolism referring to Israel. Which Jesus indicated they were seeking for bread and said unto them that he was the bread of life.

So I wouldn't just simply read, but should use spiritual discernment becasue there was an body in the old testament which was that body (covenant) of death, Likewise in the new testament a body of life. That old covenant of flesh was given the laws of God as the words or commandments of God. Therefore I come to understand when 'manna' is spoke of in the old testament it's not denoting something physical to eat, but to eat the words of God much in the same way Ezekiel and John was told to eat the book which was sweet and then bitter in their belly.

Hi Beck,

I think you are dead on. Excellent analysis.
It actually kept me up last night with all of the connections. It is a contrast and a shadow of what was to come. Which has come to those who allow themselves to "get it."

There is leaven in bread. Jesus said beware the leaven of the Pharisees which is hypocracy. But he also said that the kingdom is like leaven which a woman hid in three measures of meal till the whole was leavened. We get awarenesses of Jesus being written about in the OT and it begins to change our entire outlook of scripture. "Moses wrote of me." If you believed him you would believe me etc.

So the writings of Moses speak of Jesus and our relationship with him. The law and the prophets prophecied until John. Moses wrote of me.

1. They gathered manna for five days. Awareness of Grace. Our realization that it is all from God. It is all a gift.

2. On the 6th day we/they gathered double. We come to the awareness of being heirs and fellow heirs with Christ. Ephraim and Mannasah Both got the blessing from Jacob Israel.
'Ephrayim {ef-rah'-yim} dual of 0672;; n pr m AV - Ephraim 176, Ephraimite 4; 180 Ephraim = "double ash-heap: I shall be doubly fruitful" 1) second son of Joseph, blessed by him and given preference over first son, Manasseh

3. These two awarenesses lead to the Sabbath,...Rest,... Covenant.

All three of these contain the one awareness of Grace. It is not by works, it is not by effort. It is by taking ourselves out of the picture, so to speak.
That is the leaven that is supposed to leaven or permeate the entire lump body, soul and spirit. The awareness of Grace. That it has all been done. And we have nothing to do with the process except to keep ourselves from interfering with the process. In other words believe.

All the best,
Bob

[Bob May]

Hi Bob,

If you are responsing to the True Manna then Yes I totally agree that it was Jesus, but what I was asking was toward the old testament manna. The story just seems to supernatural to me to believe and while looking for an answer I started to notice that Jesus and his disciples and even Paul spoke of bread to which denotes the both covenants. The old covenant is spoken of as Bread, Death, Flesh which all refer to the fleshness of the law and not the physical body of man.

Makes perfect sense to me.
Bob

[Beck]

Hi Beck,

I think you are dead on. Excellent analysis.
It actually kept me up last night with all of the connections. It is a contrast and a shadow of what was to come. Which has come to those who allow themselves to "get it."

Hi Bob,

I'm glad we come to the same conclusion and you are correct that there are many connections. Of which I might still be over looking some. :thumb:



There is leaven in bread. Jesus said beware the leaven of the Pharisees which is hypocracy. But he also said that the kingdom is like leaven which a woman hid in three measures of meal till the whole was leavened. We get awarenesses of Jesus being written about in the OT and it begins to change our entire outlook of scripture. "Moses wrote of me." If you believed him you would believe me etc.
You're correct here about the leaven (teachings) of the Pharisees is hypocracy and that the kingdom of God is like unto leaven or bread of which Paul said that we are one loaf and one body: We being many are one. This is to say that both Jews and Gentiles (Ephraim) is maded into one lump; one new man.



So the writings of Moses speak of Jesus and our relationship with him. The law and the prophets prophecied until John. Moses wrote of me.

1. They gathered manna for five days. Awareness of Grace. Our realization that it is all from God. It is all a gift.

2. On the 6th day we/they gathered double. We come to the awareness of being heirs and fellow heirs with Christ. Ephraim and Mannasah Both got the blessing from Jacob Israel.
'Ephrayim {ef-rah'-yim} dual of 0672;; n pr m AV - Ephraim 176, Ephraimite 4; 180 Ephraim = "double ash-heap: I shall be doubly fruitful" 1) second son of Joseph, blessed by him and given preference over first son, Manasseh
I've never noticed that of Ephraim having a double blessings with the double portion of manna for the Sabbath. Although Jesus is our Sabbath. Good Stuff.

[David M]

David, you quoted my comments so are you agreeing with me or responsing to Bob?

Hi Beck

I can see your confusion and looking at the post I could not see why I quoted the paragraph from your post, so I have removed it. I am trying to think what it was that made me select that paragraph or whether I misread it.

I think we have a level of agreement about the significance of the Manna but differ in whether we consider the provision of Manna real or not. I fully accept that Manna was provided and that it was a real event. The record says that the Manna was provided for 40 years which is the whole time that the Children of Israel wandered in the Wilderness. Another miracle that lasted the whole time they were in the wilderness is that the soles of their shoes did not wear out. I accept the story of the wilderness journey to be true and everything was true as recorded. I think when Jesus drew attention to the provision of Manna he accepted the story for what it was, a true story.

Often the number 40 is used to signify a time of testing. The wilderness journey lasted 40 years so it is recorded. My only query is whether 40 years was the actual period or whether the actual period was some other value?

David

[Ps 27:1]

Hey Guys I was wanting to know the agruments for claiming that the Manna from heaven is real vs non-real. If you can give any insight into either direction, much thanks.

Hi Beck,

I'm going to answer your question with some questions, okay?:D How do you know any of the "miracles" in the bible are real? How do you differentiate the "real miracles" from the "pretend" miracles? How do you know Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead? How do you know Jesus rose from the dead? How do you know we will rise from the dead?

Was that insightful enough?:D

Blessings,
Steve

[Beck]

Hi Beck,

I'm going to answer your question with some questions, okay?:D How do you know any of the "miracles" in the bible are real? How do you differentiate the "real miracles" from the "pretend" miracles? How do you know Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead? How do you know Jesus rose from the dead? How do you know we will rise from the dead?

Was that insightful enough?:D

Blessings,
Steve

How do we know anything in the bible is real and not functional?

[Ps 27:1]

How do we know anything in the bible is real and not functional?

Hello Beck,

Could you please elaborate on that? Because I am :confused: on what you are trying to say.:lol:

Thanks,
Steve

[Gil]

Howdy Beck,


They were starving to death. What difference does it make if God provided it by any means that he desired to.
If one is shown the way , whether it be of natural or super nature means , does that take away the miraculous?
And as to heaven, did it have to drop down out of the sky.
The kingdom of heaven being within was the same then while in the wilderness.
If Moses was spoken to by God and told which was to go to find relief, wasn't that good enough.
It was during the spring of the year an there was a natural migratory route from Africa ,across the red sea to the Mediterranean.
It was the route of quails ,that they took every year. After the long trip they dropped/landed from exhaustion in the same area that Moses had taken them.
What about the manna. Man-hu in Hebrew, meaning what's this stuff. There were low growing scrub trees through out that whole area that were called Tamarisk. There were little beetles that lived on the trees. They came out at night and feed of the trees piercing the bark. Resin flowed out and dripped to the ground. All that was said about it within the bible was for the most part true.
It also was the food supply for the swarms of ants that showed up every day to also eat it.
They say that Arab merchants even today sell it to tourists in jars.
If kept in jars to long and not allowed to solidify it would rot and have worms in it.
In the sun it wouldn't really melt but would solidify. So they say.
There were then, as now enough miracles happening.
Every miracle doesn't have to appear as a pooph ,out of nowhere.

Gil :pop2:

[Ps 27:1]

Howdy Beck,


They were starving to death. What difference does it make if God provided it by any means that he desired to.
If one is shown the way , whether it be of natural or super nature means , does that take away the miraculous?
Gil :pop2:

Hi Gil,

I've heard that explanation before and don't have a problem with it if that is what happened. The weekly sabbath thing does reinforce that God was manipulating nature, hence the "miraculous".

Blessings,
Steve

[Beck]

Hello Beck,

Could you please elaborate on that? Because I am :confused: on what you are trying to say.:lol:

Thanks,
Steve

:lol: That's what I get trying to multitask. I was asking what if anything can we read and prove it to be real? Rather than something that is figurative or even fictional. Since a great deal of the bible is written in peotic literature made of metaphors, smiles, hyperbols and figurtive speech. Where also types and shadows come into play hints my questions on does these have to be read as physical real.

There are scholar's that even think that Daniel is't a real person, but that the name given is the meaning of the book "God is my Judge". Just something to think about when reading the bible.

[Beck]

Howdy Beck,


They were starving to death. What difference does it make if God provided it by any means that he desired to.
If one is shown the way , whether it be of natural or super nature means , does that take away the miraculous?
And as to heaven, did it have to drop down out of the sky.
The kingdom of heaven being within was the same then while in the wilderness.
If Moses was spoken to by God and told which was to go to find relief, wasn't that good enough.
It was during the spring of the year an there was a natural migratory route from Africa ,across the red sea to the Mediterranean.
It was the route of quails ,that they took every year. After the long trip they dropped/landed from exhaustion in the same area that Moses had taken them.
What about the manna. Man-hu in Hebrew, meaning what's this stuff. There were low growing scrub trees through out that whole area that were called Tamarisk. There were little beetles that lived on the trees. They came out at night and feed of the trees piercing the bark. Resin flowed out and dripped to the ground. All that was said about it within the bible was for the most part true.
It also was the food supply for the swarms of ants that showed up every day to also eat it.
They say that Arab merchants even today sell it to tourists in jars.
If kept in jars to long and not allowed to solidify it would rot and have worms in it.
In the sun it wouldn't really melt but would solidify. So they say.
There were then, as now enough miracles happening.
Every miracle doesn't have to appear as a pooph ,out of nowhere.

Gil :pop2:

Hi Gil,

I understand that reasoning. There's alot that is claimed to be a miracle from God. The question that comes out of that understanding is did the beetles and the free flowing resin obey the Sabbath?

I think it has a connection to John the Baptist in the wilderness eating Locust and Wild Honey and I see those as figures of speech

[Ps 27:1]

:lol: That's what I get trying to multitask. I was asking what if anything can we read and prove it to be real? Rather than something that is figurative or even fictional. Since a great deal of the bible is written in peotic literature made of metaphors, smiles, hyperbols and figurtive speech. Where also types and shadows come into play hints my questions on does these have to be read as physical real.

There are scholar's that even think that Daniel is't a real person, but that the name given is the meaning of the book "God is my Judge". Just something to think about when reading the bible.

I'm still having a hard time deciphering your first few sentences. Are you sure you're not still multitasking?:lol:

I know the bible has a lot of poetry in it, but I believe the people and events of the bible were real. I believe in a 6 day creation, a literal Adam and Eve, a worldwide flood, a literal parting of the seas, real manna, real David and Goliath, real Daniel in the lion's den, etc. I also believe in a literal Jesus who literally rose from the dead with a real glorified body and that he is really coming back to earth to get his bride, the Church.



I understand that reasoning. There's alot that is claimed to be a miracle from God. The question that comes out of that understanding is did the beetles and the free flowing resin obey the Sabbath?

It's a good thing I didn't have any liquids in my mouth because I was :hysterical::lmbo::rofl: and it would have gotten all over my laptop. That has got to be the funniest thing I have ever read on this forum. You did mean it as a joke, didn't you? If not, oh well, it still struck me as very funny when I first read it. Thanks for the chuckle.:thumb:

Blessings,
Steve

[Bob May]

Hi Gil,

I understand that reasoning. There's alot that is claimed to be a miracle from God. The question that comes out of that understanding is did the beetles and the free flowing resin obey the Sabbath? I think it has a connection to John the Baptist in the wilderness eating Locust and Wild Honey and I see those as figures of speech

Hi Beck,
Excellent question. Also if the Israelites were eating sap for 40 years I think they would have been smart enough to call it sap by then instead of "What is it."
Bob