My family buys Ezekiel bread quite often. It’s a product inspired by Ezekiel 4:9:
Take also unto thee Wheat, and Barley, and beans, and lentils, and millet, and Spelt, and put them in one vessel, and make bread of it…
The hilarious thing is they didn’t seem to read the rest of the chapter, because a few verses later God says:
And you shall eat it as a barley cake, baking it in their sight on human dung.
Ezekiel whines to God about this, so God, in his infinite kindness, says it’s okay to use cow dung instead of human dung.
Now who wants some scrumptious Ezekiel bread?
I wouldn’t have thought human dung would burn adequately to bake anything. I thought the point of ungulate dung is it contains a significant fraction of undigested cellulose. But ICBW (maybe if you had a *really* high-fiber diet?).
But the bread itself sounds delicious and very healthy!
So is consuming the bread a spiritual experience or is it just purchased to increase the buyer’s feeling of spiritual fulfilment? It doesn’t sound as though it tastes nice.
I have a feeling this is one of those occasions where the faithful take what they can use from the Bible and disregard the stuff they dislike.
That’s hilarious!
And what a weird story… Was it a punishment to have to bake it on dung? Some sort of lesson?
@trj: I don’t think it’s a case of disregarding the stuff they dislike, but a case of being ignorant of the Bible. I would say most Christians have read very little of the Old Testament.
@Chris – it’s definitely true that most Christians have no idea what the book of Ezekiel says, but at some point in the past, someone did have to go through and cherry-pick that verse.
I always wonder who in the world knows the Bible well enough to find things like that but still wants to use such a passage as inspiration for a bread-making recipe.
Yikes! I grew up on Ezekiel (Brand) bread. And there I thought that was *peanut butter* my mom was spreading on thereon! :-P
It has probably occurred to some people that there is a possible third (at least explaination for the origin of species on our planet.
That is that some life here has been seeded and/or altered by extra terrestrial visitors.
Some species seem to be not that well suited to life in earths environment, even though they’ve been here for millions of years.
Reptiles have to spend roughly half of thier lives sleeping in mud just to exist here.
Humans as well are the only species that need clothing and shelter just to exist here.
Most will say that this is proof of adaptation. Well,it must be working in reverse since the species we supposedly evolved from does not need clothing or that much shelter to survive.
It also appears as though we might have been genetically altered from chimps or apes, and possibly hybridized, since we have less genes than them.
You have to admit that some life on this planet does look preety alien.
Here’s a cool,cutting edge physics/science web site.
http://www.physorg.com/
We may all be hungry enough in the future to want dung flavored cakes if we don’t start educationally,scientifically and compassionately dealing with population control.
@murrowcronkite:
>”Some species seem to be not that well suited to life in earths environment, even though they’ve been here for millions of years. Reptiles have to spend roughly half of thier lives sleeping in mud just to exist here.”
The success of a species is measured in its ability to subsist, not in its ability to lead interesting lives. So purely based on their historical record, reptiles are highly suited for life on Earth.
> “Humans as well are the only species that need clothing and shelter just to exist here.”
Clothing, yes, shelter, no. We’re hardly unique in using shelter. We could survive without those two, though; there’d just be fewer of us.
> “It also appears as though we might have been genetically altered from chimps or apes, and possibly hybridized, since we have less genes than them.”
Incorrect. We have one fewer chromosome than chimps (because two of them appear to have fused in humans), but this is not the same as saying that we have less DNA material, which is what you are implying.
Apart from this, evolution does not dictate increasing complexity. Species often discard genetic material when they no longer are advantageous.
All in all, none of your arguments lead to your conclusions.
Try being more critical of your sources and your arguments. It is obvious that in your desire for the world to be a fantastic place, you are uncritical and biased in the extreme. Your observations seem to follow your conclusions, not vice versa. Just a well-meant piece of advice.
The explanation as to why humans have one less chromosome than other primates is thoroughly documented.
Thanks for this post though, will make for some interesting conversation!
“Some species seem to be not that well suited to life in earths environment, even though they’ve been here for millions of years.
Reptiles have to spend roughly half of thier lives sleeping in mud just to exist here.
Humans as well are the only species that need clothing and shelter just to exist here.”
Um, those examples make it sound like reptiles and humans are actually VERY well-suited to life on Earth. I really have no idea what you’re getting at.
“Well,it must be working in reverse since the species we supposedly evolved from…”
Stop right there. We did not evolve from any extant species. We, and any extant species, evolved from a common ancestor.
“…does not need clothing or that much shelter to survive.”
Er, per your own examples, both us and reptiles use shelter to better our survival odds.
“It also appears as though we might have been genetically altered from chimps or apes, and possibly hybridized, since we have less genes than them.”
Even if it were true that we have less genes then them, what about that fact would make it seem like we’ve been altered or hybridized from them?
Also realize that extraterrestrial intelligent design still has all the same problems as the “mainstream” brand of intelligent design.
Wisdom teeth are proof that there is no intelligent design. I’m just sayin’.
If there’s intelligent design it really doesn’t seem all that intelligent.
I mean think about it, we digest imperfectly–there’s always leftover stuff. Why don’t we just absorb it all?
Heck, we only last three days without water. Why don’t we have a camel’s hump or something?
Teeth–why would we need to break stuff down to make it digestible? Couldn’t the designer just make our food grow naturally bite-sized?
Of course that’d really change cattle farming …
And TOES! Toes are clear proof that there’s no intelligent designer. What possible use can having ten digits to stub on midnight furniture have, eh?
At least our designers could have given us good night vision to compensate.
Couldn’t we at least regrow teeth like sharks, if we have to have one pulled, or lose one? I mean, why do SHARKS get all the luck? Maybe the planet was designed for sharks. There’s a whole lot more ocean than landmass. Coincidence?
:::::hearing the Jaws theme:::::
Alrighty! I sure am hungry for some bread!
Wow. The bible is used to hate on plenty of things and people, but I never thought whole grain sprouted bread would be one of them. Have some Wonderbread and enjoy your heart attacks…
i bought this bread thinking that it would be good to switch over to something more “natural”. I used it like regular sandwich bread for a week, and boom! BIG MISTAKE. My intestines are definitely not happy campers. Now, I’ve got my own lamentations going on. Oi-veh, it’s potty time. Again.
Dont you people know people have been cooking over all kinds of dried dung even human for thousands of years. Even early Americans used dried dung to cook over. They didn’t all live or camp where there was firewood. They didn’t just lay the food right on the dung to cook it, they had cooking vessels even back then. Learn your history!!!
@Susan: Of course I know that. But it’s still funny.
$10 says Susan’s in 7th grade.
The bread itself is really irrelevant. The instruction to use human dung for fuel (not an ingredient except indirectly flavoring the bread) was designed to shock a complacent people into seeing their future punishment. Ezekiel’s response isn’t “whining” it’s utter repulsion as a priest who’s lived by God’s own dietary laws. God relents (like He did when Moses interceded not to destroy Israel) and allows the less vulgar and much cleaner “cow patty”. God’s intention is obviously to shock a nearly un-shockable people. He did this over and over with wild schemes to get His people’s attention. He is a rule-breaker from His great commitment to have people repent and turn to Him; and His prophets (now the Church) should be available to be made “fools for Christ” along with Him.
I found an interesting article from the Jewish perspective that explains the meaning of the bread that God commanded Ezekiel to make and eat. It also explains the why pretty good. If you care to know where it came from and what it is about read this – http://www.karaitejudaism.org/talks/Yehezqel_Lechem_Ezekiel_Bread.pdf
I don’t know how this got pulled out as something to copy. Ingredients were added to make it a bread that is good for eating like the modern version. There was no honey, no salt, no leavening. It was a flat bread that was baked directly on the coals of the fire.