05-14-2008, 03:22 PM
|
 | Lanesterator Minimus | | Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Hague, North Dakota
Posts: 1,509
Thanks: 370
Thanked 929 Times in 379 Posts
| |
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorbravo  Quote:
Originally Posted by greenbaggins I am asking to see if anyone has some clarity on whether this is a legitimate reading of the relationship of leaven and yeast: Leaven is not yeast per se. Bread made today from packets of yeast is unleavened bread. Leaven means the lump of sourdough is broken off, mixed with flour, water, etc., and then the new loaf rises. Meanwhile, the remaining sourdough starter is fed with more flour and water, and left to rise, to be used the next day. This can continue for many years; but Israel was told to cut it off and start over every year (from James Jordan's commentary on Daniel, entitled The Handwriting on the Wall, pg. 72, footnote 24). | Well, it's true that modern yeast is different from sourdough. The leaven in sourdough is composed of certain lactobacilli (bacteria that eat lactate) and wild yeasts.
I think it would be a stretch to argue against the commandment solely on the basis that modern yeast is not leaven, considering that the action of modern yeast is pretty much the same as the old sourdough combination of yeast and bacteria. They both digested portions of the dough to produce gas. | What commandment are you referring to? Jordan is arguing that Israelites were to start a new batch of starter each year.
|