go to some of these other laws that we have that we can think about. So I think we'll just kind of, I have a list here of things to look at. And we can either read the passages or we can just talk about it if we know enough off the cuff to think about it. But the first one I want to do is circumcision. I want us to think about circumcision. Oh, did we not do mixing kinds? I thought I had mixing kinds. Oh, we didn't. Okay, let's look at mixing kinds. So this is in Leviticus 19, 19 through 25. You shall keep my statutes. You shall not let your cattle breed with a different kind. You shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed. You shall not wear a garment of cloth made of two kinds of material. Then I have an underline, because that's one law. So it's a mixing of kinds law. Then you have a second law. If a man lies sexually with a woman who's a slave assigned to another man and not yet ransomed or given her freedom, a distinction shall be made. They shall not be put to death because she was not free. She shall bring His compensation to the Lord, to the entrance of the tent and meeting, a ram for a guilt offering, and a priest shall make atonement for him with the ram and the guilt offering before the Lord for his sin that he's committed, and he shall be forgiven for the sin he's committed. And then I have an underline. Then there's the third law. When you come into the land and plant any kind of tree or food, then you shall regard its fruit as forbidden. Three years it shall be forbidden you. It must not be eaten. And in the fourth year, all its fruit shall be holy, an offering of praise to the Lord. In the fifth year, you may eat of its fruit to increase its yield for you. I am the Lord your God. So you're reading this, and if you read all of Leviticus 19, you see this over and over. It seems like a random law, random law, random law, random law. How in the world do I make sense of this? And I think I might have told you guys that I did a lesson many years ago on this with a bunch of kids, and I just started reading it. And then we just kind of raised our hands. And how many of you think this law should continue today? And on the one, they'd all raise their hands. Say, yeah, that one should continue. And then you go, how many of you think this next law should continue today? And half the kids raised their hand. And then the next one, how many of you think this law should continue? And nobody raised their hand. And then the next one, everybody raised their hand. And I'm like, on what basis do you get to decide this? So I decided to just look at the center of Leviticus 19 here and not look at the rest of them, because most of the rest of them are more moral in 10 commandment kind of things. But these are very different. And they're right in the middle of this chapter, and then it goes back to more kind of moral things. And it's like, what is going on here? So first thing I think we should do is let's look at each law, identify whether you think this is civil or ceremonial. and then how, what its moral principle would be, okay? And then when we're done with that, doing that with all three, then I'm gonna tell you the context in which this falls. So the first one, keep my statutes, you shall not let your cattle breed of the different kind, you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, you shall not wear a garment of cloth made of two kinds of material. Moral, purely moral, civil or ceremonial, what do you think? Ceremonial, that's interesting, why? So what you've done there is you've connected it to essentially the first table of the Ten Commandments, which I've said is ceremonial. And so I think that that is appropriate. Anybody want to disagree or say something different? In what way? Well, let's, Yeah, let's just look at the individual second one. You shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed. This is about what kind of occupation does this? Farmers. You don't usually think of farmers as priests, do you? They're farmers, OK? So I think that what's going on here is that you have application that's probably more civil in terms of, you know, cattle breeding with other kind, that's also a rancher kind of a thing. Who is it that sews cloth together? Weavers, or what'd you say? Tailors. Tailors, okay. And so those are civil kinds of things, right? Those are not usually thought of in the realm of religion, I suppose. But, even though those are more civil laws, I think that Chris is exactly right, that this is ceremonial in nature. Can you think of anything in scripture that goes, that's found earlier than this where there's a mixing of kinds? Yeah, Genesis 6, 1 through 4. It's exactly what it is. And that's where you've got the heavenly beings mixing with the human women and then the giants come. So that's definitely, I'm going to read Jude and he's talking about how they give up their proper domain, the angels, and they came down here. God has set kinds on purpose. He didn't want them to be mixed together. This is what Genesis 1 is all about. He made them according to their kind, according to their kind, according to their kind. And then I think it's in Genesis 6 or 7, it repeats that language again. And all the animals went according to their kind, according to their kind, according to their kind. And that's the only other time you really find that in all the scripture. Why? Because we're dealing here with creation. God made his creation a specific way and he doesn't want us tampering with it. That's the moral principle going on here. In pertaining to the ceremonial, they were commanded to bring certain kinds of animals as sacrifices, certain kinds of grain or seed as sacrifices. I'm trying to find something for the cloth, but I can't in my mind. animal when it is mingled, when it's cross-blood. And you could not sacrifice those kinds of animals. You couldn't bring a grain offering if you had wheat cross-pollinating with oats, you know, and you get some hybrid. It's not a pure grain. And the idea of the purity in the sacrifices was a foreshadowing of Christ, of his perfectness, his pureness, and so that's what he wanted them to do. Well, then your cattlemen wouldn't be able, or your sheep herders, whatever, wouldn't have been able to give those animals, or sell those animals, or whatever it was. You wouldn't have had a pure animal to breed, and there's no sacrifice for you. Although, in this kind of thing, you're looking a little bit too deep into that. Like you're saying, you have two animals that can breed with each other and produce something with spots that's, you know, like you're talking about. It would still be the same kind, would it not? Well, I mean, we're moving into modern taxonomy, I suppose, right? So I don't know how we can answer what is a donkey and consider it for those people. I don't know. We're talking about things like tigers and lions and all that kind of stuff. Yeah. Torsten and I were kind of talking about this a while back when we did the age here. Yeah, we will get to that. So we were kind of talking about it, and he grew up on a farm. And I remember visiting the farm and the grain house. And they grew different kinds of grain, and they kind of had this kind of grain here and this kind of grain there. Anyway, so he said, the only way you can keep the animals from mixing is to keep them separate. The only way you can keep the grain from mixing is to keep them separate, like separate bins, separate barns, separate. So I was thinking about that in relation to, you know, come out of her, my people, you know, be separate. So I was kind of wondering how the separateness is also, that's different than mixing. Yeah, yeah. Well, it's kind of the inverse of it, don't you think? Yes, but you said that the whole reason God doesn't want mixing of kinds, so you don't want mixing of kinds, but it seems like the only way that can happen is to be separate. So yes, it's the inverse. But what is the moral component then? How would you say that? So separateness by definition is holiness. That's what the word holy is. It's to be separate, to be other than. Okay, so you guys have both here kind of wanted to go in this direction. It's appropriate to do that. So if we can identify that there's some kind of moral principle here, then we can see that maybe the moral principle could continue. But if we see that there's ceremonial law here, and we can see that there's typeful, anti-type fulfillment in Christ, then we can also make sense of what doesn't continue with this and what does continue. So let's kind of move into that with this law. Let's think about what we just said. You've kind of brought us there already, Chris, which I think is very helpful. And also, Mom, when you're talking about Israel being a chosen people, a separate people, this law is right in line with what God was doing for the nation of Israel. They are unlike the other nations. They were separate by definition because God did not choose them among the 70 nations of Babel. He created them out of nothing. And he said, you are my people, you are to be separate, you are not to be like them. And so your laws need to be in accordance with who you are as a people. So that principle of separateness is in that law, the principle of mixing and what God has created is in that law, and it was there for a reason in the nation of Israel, very specifically in these ways, to keep them separate as a nation of people, and therefore as a people holy to the Lord. But now there's a ceremonial component in here, which we've talked about with sacrifices, that's intimately related to this. It's not in this law per se, but it's a principle that's a part of it, which is that a sacrifice has to be pure. It has to be pure blood. Jesus, that's exactly what he is. I even said that today in the baptism thing. He's without spot or blemish. He's the perfect lamb. Jesus does not have any sin. And so if that's true, and then his sacrifice is once for all, then what does that do to the ceremonial component of this law? It fulfills it. It's gone. Just for the same reason that we no longer offer animal sacrifices is the same reason that the ceremonial principle behind this law is no longer there. Understand? OK, go ahead, Louise. Is this still applicable today, though? in the sense that in the New Testament, Christ is seen parable as the field and sowing seed. And we know that the field's the word and, or the world, and the seed's the word. And this garment language that you hear the apostles speaking of, of putting off and putting on, it's. Right, right. You're putting off the old and you're putting on Christ. Right. So that this is still today, Yeah, we'll talk about that. And if I don't do it, then you have to stop me and make sure before I go on, okay? I've got like all kinds of hands here. Let me keep going with this, and maybe I'll answer your questions or not, and then we'll deal with it. So this is kind of complicated. Okay, so we're gonna try and unravel it. There's a ceremonial component that I'm saying is gone with regard to the law itself and the mixing of cattle and the mixing of clothing. The ceremonial idea behind it is taken away because Jesus fulfilled that. Now, that doesn't mean there's not a moral component behind it that is eternal. And that's why I kind of, I focused on the kind part, but we can also focus on the separateness part of that as well. So like, we can go off into kind of some weird topics like transhumanism and stuff like that. How people, these scientists are trying to create a hybrid of artificial intelligence and human, or hybrid animals and humans, and all this kind of Island of Dr. Moreau sort of stuff that they're doing. My opinion is that the moral principle behind this never goes away, and that when we start messing around with this, we're doing exactly the same things that the angels were doing that was forbidden before the flood, before any kind of national law to Israel ever came around. So just because the ceremonial component of sowing your field with two kinds of seed is gone, it doesn't necessarily mean that the moral component is gone. Okay? We can actually talk about this with grain and what they've done to our grains over the last 80 years. How we do not have pure grains anymore. Corn, wheat, it's utterly devastated by all the stuff that we've done that is At least you could probably make an argument that there's something going on with this law that we have been violating on a moral level, okay? That means, if I'm right about this, then that means that we need to do a better job as Christians today thinking about the moral implications of mixing two kinds of seed, or however we want to, you know, we can make it even more crazy if we want. We may not all come to the same opinions on this. And some of them we might agree and some of them we might disagree. So for example, you might go, well, what would be the wrong with making a material made of wool and cotton or something like that if it works? And we might say, well, I can't think of any kind of a moral reason why that would be a problem. I think that we have freedom with that with regard to freedom in Christ on those kinds of questions. I can. No, maybe you can. Being a welder, you have to wear cotton. It burns even worse than just the spark or something like that. OK, well, I can make an opposite argument, which is that I really like to have the light, thin materials that they've made so that I can go climb mountains in the winter. But you might come back to me and say, well, maybe God doesn't want you climbing mountains in the winter. But my point is we can have an argument about that. And I think that we're free to disagree on some of these. But we need to make sure that as we're disagreeing or thinking through it that we Understand what the moral principle is behind it and that we're not willing to have any of us disagree on that moral principle But no, I think it's a it's a fun thing pineapple on pizza is a definitely a good thing Now one last element behind this, so we've got the how does this apply today, and I think that there's a moral component to very practical things, farming, whatever, that continues today that we need to think through as Christians. But then there's a spiritual component, which is the spiritual moral principle behind it that never actually goes away. So, you've brought that up. We are to be a people that are separate as Christians. Now our separateness does not look the same as Israel's separateness did. Because it's not a national separateness, it's a spiritual separateness. We're Christians, we're not to be mingling with other religions in the way that we do our Christianity, for example. We're not to be compromising on our morality because the LGBTQ says that you have to do that in order to be accepted in our society. That would be an example of mixing of kinds that is not allowable. And it continues to this day on a spiritual level for God's people in his holy temple, which still continues today. So do you see what I'm saying? When you're looking at just something as seemingly benign and you're like, it's just simple to go, well, that one doesn't matter today. What I want to say is there's actually lots of interesting things about this law that some of it doesn't, some of it does, and some of it we can disagree on. Yes, I think so. I mean, how can it not address syncretism? I mean, when Jeroboam is creating his syncretistic religion after Solomon dies, and the kingdom is divided, and he's up north, and he's got all these pragmatic reasons for why he wants to worship the Lord, but not in Jerusalem, he's doing little bits of syncretism as he does that. That's actually a spiritual thing that God gets angry at him for, not just a physical thing. That principle never goes away. And so now you're at the heart of the Ten Commandments again. You are not to have any other gods before me. Having other gods before him is a mixing of kinds. And that's why I think you rightly brought up the First Commandment with regard to this particular law. Right. You know, like what God has put together, what God has created, let us as men not put us under. And when you when you hear these guys in the transhumanism movement, there is a serious God complex that these guys have. And they and they say it out loud. They're like, we're playing God. That's what we are. We are removing him and your need for him. And that's our whole purpose behind it. Uh-huh. Yeah, yeah. What are you talking about? Thank you, Louise. So let's think about the word trans. You know what the word trans means? It means beyond and human. Trans human. So the idea is, can we create hybrid human beings through genetic manipulation? through mRNA vaccines or something like that, through implants. I mean, if you really want to know a lot about this, talk to Brandon because he knows just about everything about it. And trust me when I say these things aren't science fiction. They are happening as we speak. Yeah. But how do we explain the fact that we now worship Elon Musk? Because he has a company that's doing it. For somebody that has a bovine Balvin, that's not what I'm supposed to be doing? Well, first of all, I've said that there's room to discuss these kinds of issues, okay? Yeah. Sure. No, I know you are. I know you are. I mean, I know it's a real dilemma. Right, right. But let's take away the ceremonial dilemma of it, okay? In terms of, is there any kind of ceremonial reason why this should turn you into a hybrid chimeric creature that can't be saved, okay? And the answer to that is no. Jesus has done that, he's taken away that once for all. You can talk about transhumanism in ways that I think a lot of Christians would be comfortable with, and then you can talk about a ways that a lot of Christians wouldn't be comfortable with. So in other words, there's a whole spectrum on things that we can do, should be doing, maybe shouldn't be doing, we don't know if we should be doing it. These are huge ethical questions that the church just isn't, we haven't really thought about, we're not dealing with them. So yeah, I would say don't worry about the fact that you have a bovine valve in your... I mean, I don't have a knee joint, a field, and grades. Right, right. That's a good thing. That's a good thing. That's a good thing. We did a paranormal podcast on transplants of organs, human organs, into other people. And there's actually a whole bunch of literature that's been done from psychology and those kind of fields, where they talk about if you receive somebody else's kidney, A part of that person is going into you. And what about memories from that person? What about feelings that that person has had that all of a sudden you start having these? And there's a whole bunch of literature that's talking about how this actually happens when people get these transplants. So I'm not going to say we shouldn't be transplanting. I am going to say that we should be thinking about what the consequences are of what we do, and do we have lines that we won't cross? If we do, what are they? How would we define what those lines are? All those kinds of questions. So what we've done now is we've moved right out of the law into ethics, which you kind of have no choice but to do. But it's very important, and yeah, we just have not done a good job thinking about it. My point is, let me go back to the point here to kind of help the feeling that you have, because there's nothing you can do about having a bovine valve in your heart. There are parts of these laws that continue. There are parts that don't continue. And there are parts that I would think are neutral in how they would continue. And it's not as simple as just saying, nope, that one doesn't apply anymore, move on. Or, yep, that one applies, move on. And that's what people have done. Like, if you take the feast days and the Jewish church that's here on Saturday, what would they say about the feast days? Oh, they continue. Just keep on doing the feast days. Most Christians haven't taken that view. Or most of us just feast every day. Right, yeah. I was going to say about one of Chris's favorite meats to put on the smoke here is beef. So, I mean, if you start sweating a little bit, It's actually not that far down the line. Yeah, it's not that far down the timeline. there will be no human being on Earth that still has normal, typical human DNA. And he says the biggest reason for that is, especially now, when people can travel anywhere, and they can meet people from all over the world, there's no separation between types of people. And what that has done is totally changed the human genome. Things that weren't a problem even 20, 25 years ago have become huge problems because of that mixing of different people groups. And he said, that's not a religious thing, that's purely... Yeah, he's not even talking transhumanism out there. I think he's just talking about what's, you know... the things that we've done before that. Traffic in opening up societies, all those kinds of things. Yeah, it's really, really crazy. We're living in absolutely crazy times. So. I heard that in 80 from a lady studying that there'll be one race, she said, in 100 years. 100 years. That was in 1980. But here's the thing. Bunyan talks about the soul. So this got my head reeling. Because Bunyan, seems to state and deduct that our memory, our emotions, our person is the unseen us. And I'm trying to now understand more of what happens at death. Because Christ said, remember in your lifetime, there's something very clearly here disconnected from this that lives on. And I've been studying that a long time just to look that the real us is not, they can make us the bionic man, but they're never going to be able to find the soul. I don't think they're going to be able to. And this is hidden in on that. I mean, like, when you said somebody's feelings or emotions will be in you for a while. It's not that they will be. It's that they literally are. Yeah, these are things that have happened. I was thinking out loud here, how does that happen if her soul is different from mine? Yeah, you're not giving your soul to somebody else. That's the immaterial part of who we are. That ought to give people comfort. You know, what popped into my head is the whole idea of cremation versus burial that people have that topic. We've discussed that in here. You know, I have my views of why these two forms of burial or getting rid of the body or whatever have been performed in the past. One is definitely rooted in something, well, I don't know if it's rooted in Christianity, but Christians used burial for specific reasons, honoring the body and stuff. Pagans didn't, and they burned the body. But, so there's a question then of, well, should a Christian Cremate or should they bury? Well, I would say preferably you should bury. But now we get to the soul question. What happens if somebody is burned at sea and then the boat goes into the ocean and their body is completely dispersed? What happens to their soul? Well, they go to heaven. So in other words, it's not a salvation issue. It's a different kind of an issue. It's an issue of Should we, is it important to honor the body like they honored Jesus' body? Is that something Christians should, should we continue to do that? Or should we just say, no, that doesn't matter anymore? That's the ethical question that that brings up. But my point is that it's not a salvation issue. And that's because Jesus has taken care of that for us, okay? Not that it was ever a salvation then anyway, because salvation has always been by faith in Christ. Jeepers, I did not think that one law would last this long. So all right, we'll continue with the second and third ones as we go along here next week. They're not as crazy as transhumanism, so you don't have to worry about getting into that again. But yeah, if you've never heard of that whole topic, it's Nuttyville, but it's rapidly coming upon us.