The Sanctuary Service
by
M.
L. Andreasen
11.
THE DAILY SERVICE
12.
THE DAY OF ATONEMENT
13.
THE SCAPEGOAT
14.
FEASTS AND HOLY CONVOCATIONS
15.
PRAYER
16.
THE LAW
17.
THE SABBATH
18.
THE LAST CONFLICT
19.
THE LAST GENERATION
20.
THE JUDGMENT
PREFACE
FOR CENTURIES GOD'S PRESENCE ON EARTH was associated with the sanctuary.
It was through Moses that the command first came: "Make Me a sanctuary; that I may
dwell among them." Ex.25:8. When the tabernacle, as
the first sanctuary was called, was finished, "a cloud covered the tent of the
congregation, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle." Ex.40:34. Henceforth God
communicated with His people "from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubim which
are upon the ark of the testimony," in the most holy, the second apartment of the
tabernacle. Ex.25:22.
As God's earthly dwelling place, the sanctuary must
ever be of deep and abiding interest to God's people. When we understand
that the services conducted in the tabernacle and later in the temple were
symbols of a higher service in the true tabernacle above; that all the ritual
and all the sacrifices pointed to the true Lamb of God, the sanctuary becomes
of still more importance. In it the gospel is revealed.
Christians would do well to study the sanctuary and
its services. They contain precious lessons for the devout student.
Christ is seen as the great High Priest, a role which to many church
members has lost its significance. And yet, Christ's work as High Priest
is the very essence of Christianity, the heart of the atonement.
It is the hope and prayer of
the author that this little book may lead some, perhaps many, to a deeper
appreciation of what Christ means to them and of what He is doing for them; and
that they may, through the new and the living way which Jesus has consecrated
for them through the veil, go with Him into the most holy where He is now
officiating.
THE
AUTHOR
Chapter One
THE FIRST PICTURE WE HAVE OF GOD
after man sinned is that of Him walking in the garden in the cool of the day,
calling unto Adam, "Where
art thou?" Gen.3:9. The picture is both
beautiful and significant. Man has sinned and disobeyed the Lord, but God
does not forsake him. He is looking for Adam. He is calling, "Where art thou?" These are the first
recorded words of God to man after the fall.
It is not without significance that we are thus
introduced to God. He is looking for and calling to Adam, seeking a
sinner who is hiding from Him. It is a picture similar to that of the
father in the parable, who day after day watches for the form of his prodigal
son, and runs to meet him while he is yet "a great way off." Luke 15:20. It is a picture similar to that
of the shepherd who "goeth
into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone
astray,"
and "rejoiceth
more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray." Matt.18:12,13.
Adam did not fully understand what he had done or
the results of his disobedience. God had told him that sin meant death,
that "in the day
that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Gen.2:17. But Adam had never seen
death, and he did not comprehend what it involved. It was to impress upon
his mind the nature of sin that God clothed Adam and Eve in the skins of
animals that had been sacrificed. Adam, looking at death for the first time,
must have been profoundly impressed with the sinfulness of sin. There the
lamb lies still, blood oozing out. Will it never live again? --Will it
never again eat or walk or play? Death suddenly takes on a new and deeper
meaning for Adam. He begins to understand that unless the Lamb dies for
him, he will be dead like the animal lying at his feet, without future, without
hope, without God. Ever after, the skin in which he was clothed reminded
him of his sin, but also, and more, of salvation from sin.
The picture of God making garments for His children
about to be driven from their home, reveals the love of God for His own, and
His tender consideration for them, even though they have sinned. As a
mother wraps warm, protecting garments about the little ones before sending
them out into the bitter wind, so God lovingly clothes His two children before
sending them forth. If He must send them away from Him, they are to bear
with them the token of His love. They must have some evidence with them
that God still cares for them. It is not His intention to leave them to
struggle alone. He must drive them out of the Garden of Eden, but He
still loves them. He provides for them.
Because of their sin, God had to exclude Adam and
Eve from the home He had prepared for them. It must have been with great
sorrow of heart that the two left the place where they had first met, which
held such blessed memories for them. But it must have been with
immeasurably greater sorrow that God commanded them to leave. He had
created them. He loved them. He had planned for them a future.
But they had disobeyed Him. They had chosen another master.
They had eaten of the forbidden fruit. "And now," said God, "lest he put forth his hand, and
take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever: ...He drove out the
man." Gen.3:22-24.
God did not leave Adam in a condition of despair.
He not only promised that the Lamb "slain from the foundation of the world" should die for him, thus
providing objective salvation, but He also promised to help him resist sin by
giving him capacity for hatred of it. "I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and
between thy seed and her seed," God said. Gen.3:15. An interpretation of this text, without doing
violence to it, would be: "I will put hatred for evil into your heart." This hatred is vital to
our salvation. Humanly considered, as long as love of sin is in the
heart, no man is safe. He may resist evil, but if there is in his heart a
love for it and a hankering after it, he is not on safe ground. Of Christ
it is said, "Thou
hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity." Heb.1:9. It is important to learn
to hate evil. The first promise in the Bible is a promise of hatred for
sin. Only as the iniquity of sin becomes real to us, only as we learn to
hate evil, are we safe. Christ not merely loved righteousness; He hated
iniquity. This hatred is fundamental in Christianity. And God has
promised to put this hatred for sin into our hearts.
In the promises to Adam and in God's treatment of
him, the gospel is summed up. God does not leave Adam to himself after he
has sinned. He looks for him; He calls to him. He provides a
Savior for Adam, symbolized by the sacrificial lamb. He promises Adam to
help him so to hate sin that he will by the grace of God abstain from it.
If Adam will only cooperate with God, all will be well. Provision
is made for a return to the estate from which he has fallen. He need not
be conquered by sin. By God's help he can overcome it.
This is brought out forcibly in the story of Cain
and Abel. Cain is wroth; his countenance is fallen. He has murder
in his heart, and is ready to kill Abel. God warns him that "sin coucheth
at the door; ...but do thou rule over it." Gen.4:7 RSV. This was a merciful
warning to Cain, and a statement of hope that he need not be overcome by sin.
As a wild beast ready to pounce upon its victim, sin couches at the door.
In the words of the New Testament, Satan goes about "as a roaring lion." But Cain need not be
overcome. "Do
thou rule over it" are God's words. This is more than a statement; it is a promise.
Man need not be overcome. There is hope and help in God. Sin
is not to have dominion over us. We are to rule over it.
Originally it was God's intention that man should
have free communion with his Maker. This was the plan He attempted to
carry out in the Garden of Eden. But sin thwarted the original design of
God. Man sinned, and God sent him forth into the earth. Henceforth
sorrow would be his lot.
But God conceived a plan whereby He might be
reunited with His people. If they had to leave the home prepared for
them, why should not God go forth with them? If they could not live in
Paradise, where they could enjoy open communion with Him, why should not God
live with them? And so in the fullness of time, God sent word to His
people: "Make Me
a sanctuary; that I may dwell among them." Ex.25:8. Wonderful love!
God cannot bear to be separated from His own! His love devises a
plan whereby He may live among them. He goes with them on their journeys
to and fro in the wilderness, leading them into the Promised Land. God is
with His people again. True, there is a separating wall now. God
dwells in the sanctuary, and man cannot approach Him directly. But God is
as near as sin will permit. He is "among" His people.
The New Testament says of Christ, "They shall call His name
Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us." Matt.1:23. The Christian ideal is
fellowship with God, oneness with Him, no separation. "Enoch walked with God." Gen.5:24. Moses talked with Him
face to face. Ex.33:11. But Israel was not ready
for such an experience. They needed to be taught lessons of reverence and
holiness. They needed to learn that without holiness no man can see God. Heb.12:14. It was to teach them
this that God asked them to make Him a sanctuary that He might dwell among
them.
Before God asked them to build Him a sanctuary,
however, He proclaimed to them the ten commandments. Ex.20. He gave them His law that they might know what was required of them.
They stood before the mount that burned with fire. They heard the
thunders and saw the lightning; and as the Lord began speaking, "the whole mount quaked
greatly"
and the people trembled. Ex.19:16-18. The manifestation was so impressive, and "so terrible was the sight, that
Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake," and the people "entreated that the word should
not be spoken to them any more." Heb.12:21,19. The people, however, could but see and acknowledge the justice of
the requirements of the Lord, and both before and after the proclamation of the
law answered: "All
that the Lord hath spoken we will do, and be obedient." (See Ex.19:8; 24:3,7.)
It must have been with but little realization of their
own inability to do what they had promised, that they essayed so tremendous an
undertaking. From past experience they might have known that without
divine aid they could not keep the law. Yet they promised to do so,
though it was not many days before they were dancing around the golden
calf. The law forbade worshiping idols, and they had promised to keep the
law; yet here they were worshiping one of their old idols. In their
worship of the golden calf, they gave a demonstration of their inability or
unwillingness to do that which they had agreed to do. They had broken the
law they had promised to keep, and now it condemned them. It left them in
a hopeless and discouraged position.
God had a purpose in permitting this. He wanted
Israel to know that in and of themselves there was no possible hope of their
ever keeping the law of God. Yet these requirements were necessary for
holiness, and without holiness no man can see God. This brought them face
to face with the hopelessness of their own condition. The law which was
given them for life, only brought them condemnation and death. Without
God, they were without hope.
God did not leave them in this condition. Even
as in the Garden of Eden the slain lamb prefigured Christ, so now through
sacrifices and the ministration of blood God taught them that He had provided a
way of escape. Abraham understood this when the ram caught in the thicket
was accepted in the place of his son. He had doubtless not fully grasped the
significance of his own answer when Isaac inquired of him, "Behold the fire and the wood:
but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?" Gen.22:7. To this Abraham had answered: "My son, God will provide Himself
a lamb."
Verse 8. When the knife was
raised, God said, "Lay
not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou anything unto him." Verse 12. As Abraham looked about
him, he saw a ram caught in a thicket, "and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up
for a burnt offering in the stead of his son." Verse 13. Of this Christ says: "Your father Abraham rejoiced to
see My day: and he saw it, and was glad." John 8:56. In the ram caught in the
thicket, which died instead of his son, Abraham saw Christ. He rejoiced
and was glad.
The lesson which Abraham had learned, God was now
about to teach Israel. Through the slain lamb; through the bullock, the
ram, the he-goat, the turtle doves, the pigeons; through the sprinkling of the
blood upon the altar of burnt offering, upon the altar of incense, toward the
veil, or on the ark; through the teaching and mediation of the priesthood,
Israel was to learn how to approach God. They were not to be left in
hopelessness as they faced the condemnation of God's holy law. There was
a way of escape. The Lamb of God would die for them. Through faith in His
blood they might enter into communion with God. Through the mediation of
the priest they might vicariously enter the sanctuary of God, and might in the
person of the high priest even appear in the very audience chamber of the Most
High. To the faithful in Israel this prefigured the time when God's
people might with boldness enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus. Heb.10:19. All this God wanted to teach
Israel through the sacrificial system. To them it was the way of salvation.
It gave them hope and courage. Though the law of God, the ten
commandments, condemned them because of their sins, the fact that the Lamb of
God was to die for them gave them hope. The sacrificial system constituted the
gospel for Israel. It pointed the way clearly to communion and fellowship
with God.
There are those among professed Christians who do
not see much of importance or value in the God-ordained temple services; yet it
is true that the gospel plan of salvation as revealed in the New Testament is
made much clearer by an understanding of the Old Testament. In fact, it
may confidently be said that he who understands the Levitical system of the Old
Testament, can much better understand and appreciate the New Testament.
The one foreshadows the other and is a type of it.
The first lesson God wanted to teach Israel through
the sacrificial system was that sin means death. Again and again this
lesson was impressed upon their hearts. Every morning and evening
throughout the year a lamb was offered for the nation. Day after day the
people brought their sin offerings, their burnt or thank offerings, to the
temple. In each case an animal was slain and the blood sprinkled in the
appointed place. On every ceremony and on every service the lesson was
stamped, Sin means death.
This lesson is needed as much in our time as it was
in the days of the Old Testament. Some Christians think too lightly of
sin. They think of it as a passing phase of life which mankind will
outgrow. Others think of sin as regrettable, but unavoidable. They
need the lesson impressed indelibly upon their minds, that sin means death.
The New Testament, indeed, says that the wages of sin is death. Rom.6:23. Yet many fail to see or
grasp the importance of this. A more lively
conception of sin and death as inseparably connected, would help much in an
appreciation and understanding of the gospel.
Another lesson which God wished to impress upon
Israel was that forgiveness of sin can be obtained only through confession and
the ministration of the blood. This served to impress Israel deeply with
the cost of forgiveness. Forgiveness of sin is more than merely
overlooking faults. It costs something to forgive; and the cost is a
life, even the life of the Lamb of God.
This lesson is important for us also. To some,
the death of Christ seems unnecessary. God could, or should, they think,
forgive without Calvary. The cross does not seem to them an integral and
vital part of the atonement. It would be well for Christians today to contemplate
more than they do the cost of their salvation. Forgiveness is not a simple
matter. It costs something. Through the ceremonial system God
taught Israel that forgiveness can be had only through the shedding of blood.
We need that lesson now.
We believe that a study of the Old Testament
regulations concerning the manner of approaching God, will pay rich dividends.
In the sacrificial system are found the fundamental principles of
godliness and holiness which find their complete fulfillment in Christ.
Because some have not mastered these fundamental lessons, they are unable
and unprepared to go on to the greater things prepared for them of God.
The Old Testament is fundamental. He who is thoroughly grounded in
it, will be enabled to construct a superstructure that will not fall when the
rains descend and the winds blow. He will be "built upon the foundation of the
apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner stone." Eph.2:20.
GOD'S
SANCTUARIES ON EARTH
Chapter Two
IT WAS NOT LONG after the giving
of the law at Mt. Sinai that the Lord told Moses to "speak unto the children of
Israel, that they bring Me an offering: of every man that giveth it willingly
with his heart ye shall take My offering." Ex.25:2. This offering was to consist of "gold, and silver, and brass, and
blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine linen, and goats' hair, and rams' skins
dyed red, and badgers' skins, and shittim wood, oil for the light, spices for
anointing oil, and for sweet incense, onyx stones, and stones to be set in the
ephod, and in the breastplate." Verses 3-7. It was to be used in the construction of a "sanctuary; that I may dwell
among them." Verse 8.
The sanctuary here mentioned is usually called the
tabernacle. It was really a tent with wooden walls, the roof consisting
of four layers of material, the inner being of fine-twined linen, the outer of "rams' skins dyed red, and a
covering above of badgers' skins." Ex.26:14. The building itself was not very large, about eighteen by fifty-four
feet, with an outer enclosure called the court, about one hundred feet wide by
two hundred long.
The tabernacle was a portable building so made that
it could be taken apart and easily moved. At the time it was erected,
Israel was journeying through the wilderness. Wherever they went, they
took the tabernacle with them. The boards of the building were not nailed
together as in an ordinary structure, but were separate, each set upright in a
silver socket. Ex.36:20-34. The curtains surrounding
the court were suspended from pillars set in brazen sockets. Ex.38:9-20. The furniture of the
tabernacle was so made that it could be easily carried. The whole
construction, while beautiful and gorgeous in design, showed its temporary
nature. It was intended to serve only until such time as Israel should
settle in the Promised Land and a more permanent building could be erected.
The building itself was divided into two apartments,
the first and larger one called the holy; the second apartment, the most
holy. A rich curtain or veil divided these apartments. As there
were no windows in the building, both apartments, especially the inner one, if
they had been dependent upon daylight, must have been dark. Because of
its temporary structure, some light may have penetrated; but at best it could
have been but little. In the first apartment, however, the candles in the
seven-branched candlestick gave sufficient light for the priests to perform the
daily service which the ritual demanded.
There were three articles of furniture in the first
apartment, namely, the table of shewbread, the seven-branched candlestick, and
the altar of incense. Entering the apartment from the front of the
building which faced the east, one would see near the end of the room the altar
of incense. To the right would be the table of shewbread, and to the left
the candlestick. On the table would be arranged in two piles the twelve
cakes of the shewbread, together with the incense and the flagons for the drink
offering. On it would also be the dishes, spoons, and bowls used in the
daily service. Ex.37:16. The candlestick was made
of pure gold. "His
shaft, and his branch, his bowls, his knops, and his flowers, were of the
same." Verse 17. It had six branches,
three branches on each side of the center one. The bowls containing the
oil were made after the fashion of almonds. Verse 19. Not only was the
candlestick made of gold, but also the snuffers, and snuff dishes. Verse 23.
The most important article of furniture in this
apartment was the altar of incense. It was about thirty inches in height
and eighteen inches square. This altar was overlaid with pure gold, and
around its top was a crown of gold. It was on this altar that the priest
in the daily service placed the coals of fire taken from the altar of burnt
offerings and the incense. As he put the incense on the coals on the
altar, the smoke would ascend, and as the veil between the holy and the most
holy did not extend to the top of the building, the incense soon filled not
only the holy place but also the most holy. In this way the altar of
incense, although located in the first apartment, served the second apartment
also. For this reason it was put "before the veil that is by the ark of the testimony
before the mercy seat that is over the testimony, where I will meet with
thee." Ex.30:6.
In the second apartment, the most holy, there was
only one piece of furniture, the ark. This ark was made in the form of a
chest, about forty-five inches long and twenty-seven wide. The cover of
this chest was called the mercy seat. Around the top of the mercy seat
was a crown of gold, the same as on the altar of incense. In this chest
Moses placed the ten commandments written on two tables of stone with God's own
finger. For a time, at least, the ark also contained the golden pot that
had the manna, and Aaron's rod that budded. Heb.9:4. On the mercy seat were
two cherubims of gold, of beaten work, one cherub at
one end and the other cherub on the other. Ex.25:19. Of these cherubim it is said that they shall "stretch forth their wings on
high, covering the mercy seat with their wings, and their faces shall look one
to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be." Ex.25:20. Here God would commune
with His people. To Moses He said: "There will I meet with thee, and I will commune with
thee from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubim which are upon
the ark of the testimony, of all things which I will give thee in commandment
unto the children of Israel." Ex.25:22.
Outside in the court immediately in front of the
door of the tabernacle was a laver, a large basin containing water. This
laver was made of brass from the mirrors which the women had contributed for
this purpose. At this laver the priests were to bathe their hands and
feet before entering the tabernacle or beginning their service. Ex.30:17-21;38:8.
In the court was also the altar of burnt offering,
which had a most important part to serve in all sacrificial offerings.
This altar was about five feet high and the top eight feet square, hollow
inside and overlaid with brass. Ex.17:1. On this altar the animals were placed when offered as burnt
sacrifice. Here also the fat was consumed and the required part of the
meat offering placed. At the four corners of the altar were hornlike
projections. In certain of the sacrificial offerings the blood was placed
on these horns or sprinkled on the altar. At the base of the altar, the
rest of the blood not used in sprinkling was poured out.
When Solomon began to reign, the old tabernacle must
have been in a somewhat dilapidated condition. It was several hundred
years old, and had been exposed to wind and weather for that long time.
David had purposed to build the Lord a house, but had been told that
because he was a man of blood he would not be permitted to do so. His son
Solomon was to do the building. This temple "was built of stone made ready
before it was brought thither: so that there was neither hammer nor axe nor any
tool of iron heard in the house, while it was in building." 1Kings 6:7.
The temple proper was about thirty feet wide by
ninety feet long. At the front entrance, which faced the east, was a
porch some thirty feet long by about sixteen feet wide. Around the other
sides of the temple three tiers of chambers were built, some of which were used
as sleeping rooms for the priests and Levites officiating in the temple, and
others as storerooms for money and other dedicated gifts. The temple was
lined inside with cedar overlaid with gold and engraved with figures of
cherubim, palms, and open flowers. 1Kings 6:15,18,21,22,29. Of this it is stated, "So Solomon built the house, and
finished it. And he built the walls of the house with boards of cedar,
both the floor of the house, and the walls of the ceiling: and he covered them
on the inside with wood, and covered the floor of the
house with planks of fir." 1Kings 6:14,15.
The original tabernacle had no floor, but in the
temple, Solomon built "both
the floor and the walls with boards of cedar: he even built them for it within,
even for the oracle, even for the most holy place." Verse 16. After having covered all
the inside of the temple with cedar so that "there was no stone seen," "Solomon overlaid the house
within with pure gold: and he made a partition by the chains of gold before the
oracle; and he overlaid it with gold. And the whole house he overlaid
with gold, until he had finished all the house." Verses 18,21,22.
In the oracle, or the most holy place, the ark of
the covenant of the Lord was placed. The original ark had two cherubim
made of pure gold. Now, however, two more cherubim were made and set on the
floor, and between these the ark was placed. They were made of olive wood, each
about fifteen feet high. "Both the cherubim were of one measure and one
size." 1Kings 6:25. "They stretched forth the wings
of the cherubim, so that the wing of the one touched the one wall, and the wing
of the other cherub touched the other wall; and their wings touched one another
in the midst of the house." 1Kings 6:27. This would give the two
cherubim a combined wingspread of about thirty feet. These cherubim were
also overlaid with gold, and on the walls of the house round about were carved
figures of cherubim and palm trees and open flowers within and without.
Even the floor was overlaid with gold. Verses 29,30.
In the first apartment of the temple several changes
were made. Before the oracle, and mentioned as belonging to it (1Kings 6:22, RV), stood the altar of incense as
in the tabernacle. Instead of one candlestick there were now ten, five
placed on one side and five on the other. These candlesticks were of pure
gold, as were also the bowls, the snuffers, the basins, the spoons, and the
censers. 1Kings
7:49,50.
Instead of one table containing the shewbread, there were ten, "five on the right side, and five
on the left." 2Chron.4:8.
The altar of burnt offering, or the brazen altar, as
it is called, was considerably enlarged in Solomon's temple. The old
tabernacle altar was about eight feet square. Solomon's altar was nearly
four times that, or thirty feet square, and about sixteen feet high. The
pots, shovels, fleshhooks, and basins used for the
service of the altar were all of brass. 2Chron.4:11,16.
The sanctuary had had a laver for bathing purposes.
In the temple this was much enlarged. It was a large basin of
bronze, fifteen feet in diameter, eight feet high, with a capacity of about
sixteen thousand gallons of water, and was called the molten sea. 1Kings 7:23-26. The bronze of which it
was made was a hand's breadth in thickness. The brim was wrought like the brim
of a cup with flowers of lilies. The whole sea rested upon twelve oxen, "three looking toward the north,
and three looking toward the west, and three looking toward the south, and
three looking toward the east: and the sea was set above upon them, and all
their hinder parts were inward." 1Kings 7:25. Besides this large sea there were ten smaller lavers placed upon
wheels, so that they could be moved about from place to place. 1Kings 7:27-37. These lavers contained
each about three hundred gallons of water and were used for washing those parts
of the animals which were to be burned upon the altar of burnt offering. 2Chron.4:6. Each of these lavers was put on a base
of brass; the wheels were "like the work of a chariot wheel: their axletrees, and their
naves, and their felloes, and their spokes, were all molten." 1Kings 7:33. The sides were
ornamented with figures of lions, oxen, cherubim, and palm trees, with "certain additions made of thin
work." Verses 29,36. The size of the court is
not given, but it must, of course, have been considerably larger than the court
of the tabernacle.
An interesting statement is found in 1Kings 6:22
concerning the altar of incense. The preceding verses describe the
oracle, or the most holy. The ark containing the ten commandments is
mentioned as being there, and in connection with this "the altar which was of
cedar." Verses 19,20. This altar, verse
twenty-two states, "belonged
to the oracle." ARV
This may
have some bearing on the question raised by the wording of the ninth chapter of
Hebrews, where the altar of incense is omitted in the description of the
furniture in the first apartment, and a censer is mentioned as being in the
second apartment. Verses
2-4.
The American Revised Version has "altar of incense" instead of censer, though the
marginal reading retains censer. Whatever may be thought of this disputed
reading, it is noteworthy that Hebrews 9:2 omits the altar of incense in the
description of the holy place. The reading in 1Kings 6:22 that the altar
of incense, while located in the holy place, "belonged" to the most holy, is generally
considered the correct rendering. We therefore understand the statement
of Exodus 30:6 to be that the altar of incense was located before the veil in
the holy place "before
the mercy seat," and that its use was such that it also in a certain sense "belonged" to the most holy. As it
is a fact that the incense filled the most holy as well as the holy place, this
seems, on the whole, the best view of the matter. (See Ex.40:26.)
The temple built by Solomon was destroyed in the
invasions of Nebuchadnezzar in the sixth century B.C. Rulers and people
had gradually departed from the Lord and gone farther and farther into idolatry
and sin. Despite all that God could do to correct evils, Israel persisted
in apostacy. God sent His prophets to them with warnings and entreaties, "but they mocked the messengers
of God, and despised His words, and misused His prophets, until the wrath of
the Lord arose against His people, till there was no remedy. Therefore He brought unto them the king of the Chaldees, who
slew their young men with the sword in the house of their sanctuary, and had no
compassion upon young man or maiden, old man, or him that stooped for age: He
gave them all into his hand." 2Chron.36:16,17.
In this destruction of Jerusalem, Nebuchadnezzar "burnt the house of God, and brake
down the wall of Jerusalem, and burnt all the palaces thereof with fire, and
destroyed all the goodly vessels thereof." Verse 19. "Them that had escaped from the
sword carried he away to Babylon; where they were servants to him and his sons
until the reign of the kingdom of Persia." Verse 20. Thus
began what is called the seventy-year captivity "to fulfill the word of the Lord
by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed her sabbaths, for as long
as she lay desolate she kept sabbath, to fulfill threescore and ten
years." Verse 21.
The splendor of Solomon's temple can be seen from
the spoil which Nebuchadnezzar took from Jerusalem. An enumeration in
Ezra gives "thirty
chargers of gold, a thousand chargers of silver, nine and twenty knives, thirty
basons of gold, silver basons
of a second sort four hundred and ten, and other vessels a thousand. All
the vessels of gold and of silver were five thousand and four hundred." Ezra 1:9-11.
Israel was in captivity seventy years. When
the days were fulfilled, permission was given for them to return, but by that
time many had been in Babylon so long that they preferred to stay.
However, a remnant returned, and in due time the foundation of the new
temple was laid. "And
all the people shouted with a great shout, when they praised the Lord, because
the foundation of the house of the Lord was laid." Ezra 3:11. However, it was not all
joy, for "many
of the priests and Levites and chief of the fathers, who were ancient men, that
had seen the first house, when the foundation of this house was laid before
their eyes, wept with a loud voice; and many shouted aloud for joy: so that the
people could not discern the noise of the shout of joy from the noise of the
weeping of the people: for the people shouted with a loud shout, and the noise
was heard afar off." Ezra 3:12,13.
The temple thus built was called Zerubbabel's
temple, after the name of the leader in the work. Not much is known
concerning its structure, but it is supposed, and perhaps with good reasons, that
it followed the lines of Solomon's temple. There was no more any
ark. That had disappeared at the time of Nebuchadnezzar's invasion.
Tradition states that holy men took the ark and secreted it in the
mountains to save it from falling into profane hands. In any event, the
most holy was vacant except for a stone which served as a substitute for the
ark on the Day of Atonement. This temple continued in use until near the
time when Christ appeared. Then Herod's temple took its place.
Herod became king in 37 B.C. One of the first
things he did was to build a fortress, Antonia, north of the temple grounds,
and connected with the temple court by an underground passage. A few
years later he decided to rebuild the temple on a grander scale than ever
before. The Jews were distrustful of him, and would not let him proceed
with the building until he had proved his good faith by collecting the material
necessary for the structure before any of the old was taken down. This he
willingly did. The priests also insisted that no common person should
work on the temple, and that it would be necessary for the priests themselves
to erect the temple structure. For this reason some years were spent in
training a thousand priests to be masons and carpenters to work on the
sanctuary. They did all the work connected with the two apartments of the
temple. Altogether, ten thousand skilled workmen were employed in the
course of construction. Building operations began about 20B.C. The temple
proper was finished in a year and a half, but it took eight more years to
complete the court and the cloisters. John 2:20 states that the temple at
the time of Christ had been forty and six years in building; in fact, it was
not until about 66 A.D., just before the destruction of Jerusalem by the
Romans, that the temple was completely finished.
Herod's temple was a most beautiful structure.
It was built of white marble covered with plates of gold, set on an
eminence with steps leading up to it from every direction, constituting a
series of terraces. It rose to a height of four hundred feet above the
valley below and could be seen from a great distance. Josephus likens it
to a snow-covered mountain. It was a thing of beauty, especially when
seen from the Mount of Olives in the morning as the sun shone upon it. It
was one of the wonders of the world.
The size of the two apartments, the holy and the
most holy, was the same as in Solomon's temple; that is, the temple proper was
about ninety feet in length and thirty in width. The holy place was
separated from the most holy by a partition about a foot and a half in
thickness with an opening before which hung the veil mentioned in Matthew
27:51, which was rent at the death of Jesus. There was no furniture in the
most holy, but only the stone left over from Zerubbabels'
temple, upon which the high priest placed his censer on the Dav
of Atonement. The furniture in the holy place was probably the same as in
Solomon's temple.
Directly above the holy and the most holy were chambers
or halls where the priests met on stated occasions. The Sanhedrin also
met there for a time. In the floor of the room above the most holy were
trap doors through which a cage could be let down into the most holy place
below. This cage was large enough to hold one or more of the workmen who
at times were needed to repair the temple. The cage was open toward the
wall, so the workmen could work on the walls without stepping out of the cage,
or, in fact, looking about them. As only the high priest could enter the
most holy place, this plan provided for making needed repairs without having
the workmen enter, or be in, the most holy as such.
On the side of the temple proper were rooms for
priests and also for storage purposes, the same as in Solomon's temple.
There was also a porch in front extending thirty-six feet beyond the side
of the temple, making the total breadth of the porch about one hundred sixty
feet.
The outside court in Herod's temple was a large
enclosure, not entirely square, about a thousand feet each way. This
court was divided into smaller courts, such as the court of the Gentiles, the
court of women, and the court of the priests. In one part of this court,
upon an immense trellis or grill, rested a golden vine of which the bunches of
grapes, according to Josephus (who, however, cannot always be trusted), were
the height of a man. According to him, the vine extended about forty feet
north to south, and its top was more than a hundred feet from the ground.
Here Herod also placed a colossal golden eagle, much to the displeasure
of the Jews. He was at last compelled to remove the eagle from the sacred
precincts.
About forty feet in front of the porch of the
temple, and east of it, stood the altar of burnt offering. This altar was
larger than the one in Solomon's temple. Josephus says it was
seventy-five feet square, but others more conservatively place it at fifty.
It was built of unhewn stones, and was about eighteen feet high. An
incline, also built of stones, led up to within a few feet of the top of the
altar. Around the altar, near the top, was a projection on which the
priests could walk in administering the prescribed sacrifices.
In the pavement near the altar were rings to which
sacrificial animals could be tied. There were also tables containing
vessels, knives, and bowls, used in the sacrificing. The altar was
connected with a kind of sewage system so that the blood poured out at the foot
of the altar was carried into the stream below. Everything was kept scrupulously
clean, even the sewage system being washed out at stated times.
Inside the walls surrounding the court were
porticoes or cloisters, sometimes called porches. The one on the east
side was called "Solomon's
porch."
The north, west, and east sides had double porticoes with two rows of
columns, and a roof of carved cedar. On the south side was the royal
porch with 162 columns. These columns were so arranged as to form three
aisles, the two outer ones being each thirty feet wide, the middle one, forty-five.
In these porches public meetings could be held. It was here the
early church gathered when they went to the temple to pray. It was the
usual meeting place of Israel whenever they went to the temple.
The part of the court nearest its entrance was
called the court of the Gentiles. A stone parapet separated this court
from the rest of the enclosure. No Gentile might go beyond its confines.
On the parapet was the inscription, "No stranger is to enter within the balustrade and
embankment around the sacred place. Whoever is caught will be answerable
for his death which will ensue." It was because the Jews thought Paul had
transgressed this ordinance that he was seized in the temple and arrested by
the Romans. Acts
21:28. In 1880 this very sign was found
and is now in a museum.
Herod's temple was perhaps the most beautiful
structure the world has ever seen. It was the pride of the Jews.
Yet it was destroyed. "There shall not be left here one stone upon another,
that shall not be thrown down," were the words of Christ. Matt.24:2. This prophecy was
literally fulfilled. Not one stone was left.
The temple is no more, and the temple service has
ceased. But the lesson remains. It would be well for us to study
carefully the service carried on in the sanctuary on earth. This will
give us a better appreciation of what is now going on in the sanctuary above.
The original sanctuary and the three temples here
mentioned had certain things in common, though they differed somewhat in
details. They all had two apartments, the holy and the most holy.
All had an altar of incense, an altar of burnt offering, a laver, a table
of shewbread, and a candlestick. The first two had an ark, which
disappeared about 600 B.C. The priesthood was the same throughout, as
were also the sacrificial offerings. For more than a thousand years
Israel gathered about the sanctuary. What a blessing might have come to
them had they discerned in their sacrifices the One promised in the Garden of
Eden, the Lamb that taketh away the sin of the world! Let us fear, lest
a. promise being left us, we likewise should seem to come short of it! Heb.4:1.
THE
PRIESTHOOD
Chapter Three
WHILE MOSES WAS IN THE MOUNT
receiving instruction from God concerning the building of the sanctuary, the
people became weary of waiting for him. He had been gone for more than a
mouth, and they were not sure when he would return, if ever. "We wot not what is become of
him"
they said. They therefore asked Aaron to make them gods such as they had
in Egypt, that they might worship them and enjoy the feasts they had celebrated
among the Egyptians. Aaron was willing to do the bidding of the people,
and soon a golden calf was made, of which the people said: "These be thy gods, 0 Israel,
which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt." Ex.32:4.
Aaron built an altar, and proclaimed a feast to the
Lord. Burnt offerings and peace offerings were sacrificed, "and the people sat down to eat
and to drink, and rose up to play." Verse 6. Moses, of course, knew
nothing of this until God informed him: "They [the people] have turned aside quickly out of
the way which I commanded them: they have made them a molten calf, and have
worshiped it, and have sacrificed thereunto, and said, These be thy gods, O
Israel, which have brought thee up out of the land of Egypt." Verse 8
Doubtless to test Moses, God now proposes to destroy
the people and to make out of him a great nation. But Moses intercedes
for the people and asks God to spare them. And God graciously accedes to
his request. "And
the Lord repented of the evil which He thought to do unto His people." Verse 14. Moses was evidently not
prepared for the sight that met his eyes when he came down from the mount.
The people were shouting and dancing, so much so that Joshua concluded: "There is a noise of war in the
camp." Verse 17. When Moses saw the length to
which Israel had gone, that they were actually engaging in the lascivious pagan
dances which they had learned in Egypt, his "anger waxed hot." He had just received
from the Lord the two tables of the law containing the Ten Commandments,
written with the finger of God, "graven upon the tables." "He cast the tables out of his
hands, and brake them beneath the mount." Verses 16,19.
It would ordinarily be thought that the breaking of
these tables would be a great sin in the sight of God. Doubtless, the act
was symbolic. Israel had sinned. They had broken the law. In
token of this, Moses breaks the tables just given him of God. And God
does not rebuke him: He merely rewrites the same commandments on two other
tables. This also may have symbolic significance. The law is not
destroyed by being broken -- God writes it again.
The sin Israel had committed was a grievous one.
God had done great things for them. He had liberated them from
bondage. He had opened for them the Red Sea. The law had been
proclaimed from Sinai amid thunders and lightnings. God had entered into
covenant relations with them, and the blood had been sprinkled upon them as
well as upon the covenant book. And now they had departed from God and
forgotten all their promises. The time had come for decisive action.
It must be known who is on the Lord's side, for surely not all have gone
astray. A call is made by Moses: "Who is on the Lord's side? let him come unto
me."
Israel hesitates. Of all the vast throng, only one tribe has the courage
to step forward. "And
all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him." Verse 26.
This courageous action on the part of the tribe of Levi
doubtless influenced their selection to the service of God. In a crisis
they ranged themselves on the side of right, and God rewarded them. They
were selected instead of the first-born to belong to God in a specific sense
and to serve at the tabernacle. Num.3:5-13. One family -- that of Aaron -- was entrusted with
the priesthood; the rest were "to do the service of the tabernacle" and "keep all the instruments of the
tabernacle of the congregation." Verses 7,8. "The
priests which were anointed, whom he consecrated to minister in the priest's
office,"
had to do with the more direct service of God at the tabernacle, such as the
lighting of the lamps; the burning of incense; the offering of all kinds of
sacrifices on the altar of burnt offering; the sprinkling of the blood; the
preparation, placing, and eating of the show-bread; preserving knowledge and
teaching the law. Num.3:3;
Ex.30:7,8; Lev.1:5; 24:5-9; Mal.2:7. The priests were all Levites, but not all
Levites were priests. The priestly office was reserved for Aaron and his
descendants. Num.3:1-4;
Ex.28:1.
The priests also had control in many civil and
personal matters. They decided when a man was unclean ceremonially, and
had power to exclude him from the congregation. Leprosy was referred to
them for examination, and upon their word hung the decision as to whether a man
was to be banished from society or whether a house was to be torn down. Lev.13,14. "Take heed in the plague of
leprosy, that thou observe diligently, and do according to all that the priests
the Levites shall teach you as I commanded them, so ye shall observe to do.
Remember what the Lord thy God did unto Miriam by the way, after that ye
were come forth out of Egypt." Deut.24:8,9.
The priests alone could restore a man to his family
after exclusion. They had jurisdiction in certain cases of suspected
unfaithfulness. Num.5:11-31. By their interpretation
of the law they came to wield a great influence and authority in many matters
affecting daily life. In difficult matters of law the priests were
associated with the judge in making judicial decisions, not merely in religious
matters, but in that which was purely civil, "matters of controversy within thy
gates." Deut.17:8. Their decision was
final. The man was admonished to do "according to the sentence of the law which they shall
teach thee, and according to the judgment which they shall tell thee." "And the man that will do presumptuously, and will not hearken unto the priest that
standeth to minister there 'before the Lord thy God, or unto the judge, even
that man shall die: and thou shalt put away the evil from Israel." Verses 11, 12.
(See also Deut.19:17.)
The priests were a class set apart from the rest of
the people. They alone could serve in the temple in the more intimate
offices of sacrifices. While it was permitted in early days for any
person to erect an altar wherever he pleased, and to offer sacrifices on it,
later it became a law that only in Jerusalem could sacrifices be offered, and
that only priests could officiate. This gave the priests tremendous power
and influence. They had control of the entire outward worship of the
whole nation. They controlled the temple grounds. Only through them
could Israel have access to the blessings of the covenant symbolized by the
sprinkling of the blood and the offering of incense. They alone could
walk the sacred precincts of the temple proper and transact with God.
It is easily conceivable that a body of men who had control
of a nation's worship, of the teaching and interpretation of law, of intimate
personal relationships, of the execution of legal decisions, would wield a
powerful influence for good or evil upon the people. When added to this
prestige is the emolument pertaining to their calling, an emolument that, in
later times at least, amounted to vast sums, we may believe that the priests
became a very exclusive organization.
The prerogatives of the priesthood were great, and
its rights were most jealously guarded. Only Aaron and his descendants could
officiate in sacrificial worship. Ex.28,29; Lev.8-10; Nu.16-18. No one could become a
priest who was not born into the family. This immediately, put great
stress upon the matter of birth, and upon the genealogical record supporting
that birth. It was incumbent upon each priest to prove his descent from
Aaron by unimpeachable evidence. There must be no flaw in the succession.
Each step must be clear.
To examine into the genealogy of each candidate
became the task of certain priests. It was later taken over by the
Sanhedrin, who spent part of their time in this work. If a priest
successfully proved his genealogical right to the office and passed the
physical test required, -- if he had no disqualifying deformity of body, -- he
was dressed in white garments, and his name was inscribed on the official list
of authorized priests. It may be that Revelation 3:5 is based upon this
custom. On the other hand, if he failed to satisfy the examiners, he was
dressed in black.
Physical deformity -- if the genealogical record was
satisfactory -- did not debar the priest from sharing in the support given to
the temple priest. Lev.21:21-23. If the defect was not
too prominent, he could even serve in some minor capacity, such as caring for
the wood used in the altar service, or as a watchman.
The priestly office being very sacred, regulations
as to whom a priest might or might not marry, were strictly enforced. A
priest might not marry a woman whose husband had put her away or divorced her.
He might not marry a prostitute or a violated maid. Lev.21:7,8. He could therefore marry
only a pure virgin or a widow, though the high priest was forbidden to marry
even a widow. "And
he shall take a wife in her virginity. A widow, or a divorced woman, or
profane, or a harlot, these shall he not take: but he shall take a virgin of
his own people to wife." Lev.21:13,14.
The priests were also to be careful as to ceremonial
defilement. They might not touch a dead body except that of a very near
kin. The high priest was denied even that. Lev.21:1-3,11. In fact, in every act of
their lives the priests were to be conscious of their need of keeping away from
anything that might defile. And this carefulness in regard to physical
defilement was only emblematic of the greater spiritual purity. "Holiness unto the Lord" was the watchword of the
priesthood. The priests and the Levites had no inheritance in the land as
did the other tribes. "They shall eat the offerings of the Lord made by fire, and His
inheritance. Therefore shall they have no
inheritance among their brethren: the Lord is their inheritance, as He hath
said unto them." Deut.18:1,2.
Instead of a portion of the land, God gave the
priests certain parts of the sacrifices which the people brought. Of
every animal sacrifice, except the burnt offering, which was wholly burnt on
the altar, and certain other sacrifices, the priests received the shoulder, the
two cheeks, and the maw. Deut.18:3. The priests also received the first fruits of corn, wine, and oil
and wool of sheep. In addition, the priests were given flour, meat
offerings baked in the oven or in the frying pan, mingled with oil or dry. Lev.2:3,10;1;2;3;4;5;24-5-9. Of the burnt offerings
they received the skin. Lev.7:8. In case of war, a certain portion of the spoil also fell to the
priesthood, both of men and cattle and gold. At times this amounted to no
inconsiderable sum. Num.31:25-54. All heave offerings and
wave offerings were the priests. Num.18:8-11. All dedicatory offerings likewise were the
priests'. Verse 14.
The first-born in Israel, both of man and beast,
belonged to the priest, though the "firstborn of man shalt thou surely redeem," that is, Israel was to pay a
stipulated sum, five shekels, for each first-born of the children. Verses 15-19. In the year of jubilee,
fields that were not redeemed, or that had been sold and could not be redeemed,
reverted to the priests. Lev.27:20,21. In case of trespasses that involved holy things, the transgressor
was to pay not only the original estimated sum, but add a fifth to it, and give
it to the priest. Lev.5:16. In case of harm done to a
neighbor, where restitution to the injured party was not possible, the command
was to "let the
trespass be recompensed unto the Lord, even to the priest." Num.5:8. The regular temple tax of a
half shekel for each soul in Israel, "the atonement money," was to be used for the service
of the tabernacle, that is, for expenses incurred in the service of God, and
did not go directly to the priest. Ex.30:11-16. Besides the above-mentioned sources of income,
there were many smaller ones, which need not here be discussed.
The incomes here enumerated were in addition to the
tithe income received by the priests. All Israel was commanded to pay
tithe. Lev.27:30-34. This tithe was to be
given to the Levites, and belonged to them. Num.I8:21-24. Of the tithe which the Levites
thus received, they were to take a "heave offering of it for the Lord, even the tenth
part of the tithe" and "give
thereof the Lord's heave offering to Aaron the priest." Num.18:26-28. It appears that in later
times tithes were paid directly to the priests. Heb.7:5. Some have thought that
this came about at the time of the second temple, when very few of the Levites returned
from captivity and it became necessary to employ Nethinims
in their stead, but this is not very clear. Ezra 8:15-20. In any event, the
priests received tithes directly or indirectly from the people, and as the
priests originally were but few in number, the income
from this source was probably more than sufficient for their needs.
The priests were ministers of God divinely appointed
as mediators between God and men, particularly authorized to officiate at the
altar and in the service of the sanctuary. In the days when books were
not common, they were not only interpreters of the law, but in many cases the
sole source of knowledge of God's requirements. Through them the people
were instructed in the doctrine of sin and its expiation, in righteousness and
holiness. Through their ministration the people were taught how to
approach God; how forgiveness might be had; how prayer might be offered to God;
how inexorable the law is; how love and mercy at last prevail. The whole
plan of salvation was laid open to them as far as it could be revealed in types
and offerings. Every ceremony tended to impress upon their minds the
holiness of God and the sure results of sin. It also taught them the
wonderful provision made through the death of the lamb. Although it was a
ministration of death, it was glorious in its promise. It told of a
redeemer, a sin bearer, a burden sharer, a mediator. It was the gospel in
embryo.
In the service of the priesthood three things stand
out prominently above the rest: mediation, reconciliation, sanctification.
Each of these deserves a special word of emphasis.
The priests were first of all mediators. This
was pre-eminently their work. Although the sinner might bring the
offering, he could not sprinkle the blood or burn the flesh on the altar.
Neither could he eat the shewbread, or offer the incense, or even trim
the lamps. All this someone else must do for him. Although he could
approach the temple, he could not enter it; though he could supply the sacrifice,
he could not offer it; though he could kill the lamb, he could not apply the
blood. God was accessible to him only through the mediation of the
priesthood. He could approach God only in the person of another.
All this would strikingly bring to mind the fact that he needed some one
to intercede for him, some one to intervene. This may be more vividly
brought to mind by supposing an occurrence which might easily be true.
A heathen who sincerely desires to worship the true
God hears that the God of Israel is the true God, and that He lives in the
temple in Jerusalem. He starts on the long journey and at last arrives at
the sacred place. He has heard that God dwells between the cherubim in
the most holy, and decides to enter that place, that he may worship God.
But he has not gone many steps into the court when he is stopped by a
sign that says no stranger may pass this sign except at the peril of his life.
He is perplexed. He wants to worship the true God of whom he has
heard, and he has also been told that God desires worship. Yet now he is
stopped. What can be done? He inquires of one of the worshipers and
is told that he must provide himself with a lamb before he can approach God.
Immediately he furnishes himself with the required animal and appears
again. Now can he see God? He is told again that he cannot enter.
"Why, then, the
lamb?" he asks.
"That you must give to the priest to sacrifice."
"Can I then enter?"
"No, there is no possible way by which you can ever enter the
temple or see God. It is not done that way."
"But why cannot I see your God?
I want to worship Him."
"No man can see God and live. He is holy, and
only he who is holy can see Him. The priest may go into the first
apartment, but there is still a veil between him and God. The high priest
only can at stated times enter the most holy. You cannot go in yourself.
Your only hope is to have some one appear for you."
The man is deeply impressed. He is not
permitted to enter the temple. Only he who is holy can do that. He
must have some one to mediate for him. The lesson sinks deeply into his
soul: He cannot see God; he must have a mediator. Only thus can sins be
forgiven and reconciliation be effected.
The whole sanctuary service is grounded in mediation.
Even though the sinner brought the lamb; even though he killed it; the
service could be made efficacious only through a mediator who would sprinkle
the blood and make application of the sacrifice.
The second prominent feature of the service was reconciliation.
Sin separates from God. It is that which hides His face from us,
and causes Him not to hear. Isa.59:2. But through the sacrificial offerings, and in the ascending incense with
the prayers, God could again be approached. Communion was restored;
reconciliation effected.
Even as mediation was the underlying purpose of the
priesthood, so reconciliation was the intent of the sacrifices offered daily
through the year. Through them, amicable relations between God and man
were restored. Sin had separated; the blood united. This was
accomplished through the ministry of forgiveness. The statement is that
when the whole congregation had sinned and had brought their offering for sin;
when the elders had placed their hands on the offering and presumably confessed
that sin, "it
shall be forgiven them." Lev.4:20. Again, the fiat goes forth that when
a ruler had sinned and had complied with the requirements, "It shall be forgiven him." Verse 26. The promise is likewise for
any one of the common people: "It shall be forgiven him." Verses 31, 35. Through sin,
estrangement had come in; but now all is forgiven.
We are reconciled to God by the death of His Son. Rom.5:10. Reconciliation is
effected by blood. 2
Chron.29:24.
Into the first apartment of the sanctuary the priest entered day by day to
commune with God. There was the holy incense reaching even beyond the
veil into the most holy; there was the candlestick emblematic of Him who is the
light of the world; the table of the Lord inviting communion; and the
sprinkling of the blood. It was a place of drawing near to God -- of
fellowship. Through the ministry of the priest forgiveness was extended,
reconciliation effected, man brought into communion with God.
The third important feature of the sanctuary service
is that of sanctification, or holiness. The amount of sin cherished in
the heart measures our distance from God. The stranger might come only so
far in the temple court. The penitent soul might come to the altar.
The mediating priest might enter the holy place. Only the high
priest -- and he but one day in the year, and that after extensive preparation
-- might enter the most holy. Clad in white he might with trembling
approach the throne of God. Even then, incense must partially conceal
him. Here he might minister not merely as one seeking forgiveness of sin,
but be might boldly ask to have them blotted out.
The daily service throughout the year, symbolized by
the ministration in the first apartment, was not complete in itself. It
needed to be completed and complemented by that of the second apartment.
Forgiveness operates only after transgression. The damage has
already been done. God forgives the sin. But it would have been
better if the sin had not been committed. For this the keeping power of
God is available. Merely to forgive the transgression after it has been
committed is not enough. There must be a power to keep from sinning.
"Go, and
sin no more" is a possibility of the gospel. But to "sin no more" is sanctification. This
is the eventual goal of salvation. The gospel is not complete without
it. We need to enter with Christ into the most holy. Some will do
this. They will follow the Lamb whithersoever He goeth. They will
be without spot or wrinkle. "They are without fault before the throne of
God." Rev.14:5. By faith they enter the
second apartment.
PRIESTS
AND PROPHETS
Chapter Four
THE TEMPLE AND THE TEMPLE
SERVICE constituted a wonderful object lesson for Israel. It was intended
to teach God's holiness, man's sinfulness, and the way to God. One of
the important lessons of the sacrificial system was to teach priest and people
to abhor sin and to shun it. When a man sinned inadvertently or through
error, he was expected to bring a sin offering to the temple. The first
requirement in the sacrificial ritual was the placing of the hands upon the
animal and the confession of sin by the sinner. Then with his own hand he
was to slay the animal. After this, the priest was to take of the blood
and put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt offering. The inwards
were then burned with the fat on the altar, and a part of the flesh was eaten
by the priests in a holy place.
This was to teach abhorrence for sin. God
intended this abhorrence for sin to be so great that men would "go, and sin no more." No normal person takes delight
in killing an innocent animal, especially if he realizes that it is because of
his sins that the animal has to die. A normal priest would certainly not
delight in the service of blood which he was compelled to perform because of
sin. To stand all day working with dead animals, dipping the fingers or
hand in the blood, and sprinkling it on the altar, could not be very attractive
or pleasant. God Himself says He delights not "in the blood of bullocks, or of
lambs' or of he-goats." Isa.1:11. Neither could the true
priest delight in it.
The sacrificial system afforded the priests an
excellent opportunity to teach the plan of salvation to offenders. As a
sinner brought his offering, the priest might say: "I am sorry that you have sinned,
as I am sure you are sorry. God, however, has made provision for the
forgiveness of sin. You have brought an offering. Place your hands
on that offering and confess your sin to God. Then kill the innocent
lamb, and I will take the blood and make atonement for you. The lamb you
are killing is symbolic of the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the
world. The Messiah is to come and give His life for the sin of the
people. Through His blood you are forgiven. God accepts your
penitence. Go, and sin no more."
Through this solemn ritual, that man would be deeply
impressed with the heinousness of sin, and would go away from the temple with a
firm determination not to sin again. The fact that he had killed an
animal would teach him as nothing else could do, that sin means death, and that
when any one sins, the lamb must die.
Beautiful and impressive as was this service, it was
capable of perversion. If the sinner should conceive the idea that his
offering paid for the sin that he had committed, and that if he only brought an
offering every time he sinned all would be well, he had an entirely wrong
conception of God's intent. Yet that is how many came to consider the
ordinances. They felt that their sacrifices paid for their sins, and
that should they sin again, another sacrifice would atone for it.
Repentance and true sorrow were minimized. The people came to
believe that whatever their sin might be, it could be atoned for by a gift.
With the presentation of their offering, they considered the transaction
closed.
In this attitude many of the priests encouraged the
people. Sin was not as abhorrent in their sight as God intended it should
be. It was something that could be paid for with the gift of a lamb which
would at most cost only a small sum. The result was that "thousands of rams" and "ten thousands of rivers of
oil"
were thought to be pleasing to God. Micah 6:7. The remuneration of the priests serving in
the sanctuary, and later in the temple, was in large part derived from the
sacrifices offered by the people. The priests came to look upon the
sacrifices as a means of income to them. The Levites, who were the
recipients of the tithe paid by Israel, in turn paid a tithe of their income
for the support of the priests. Num.18:21,26-29; Neh.10:38. In addition to this, the
priests were to retain a part of most of the sacrifices offered. Of the
burnt offerings they received the hide; of most of the sin offerings and
trespass offerings, both the hide and part of the flesh. They also
received part of the meat offerings and peace offerings, -- flour, oil, corn,
wine, honey, and salt, as well as offerings for special occasions. This
was apart from the tithes they received from the Levites.
Of the ordinary sin offerings, the priest was to eat
a part. "This
is the law of the sin offering: in the place where the burnt offering is killed
shall the sin offering be killed before the Lord: it is most holy. The
priest that offereth it for sin shall eat it." Lev.6.25 This was really a sacrificial meal.
In eating this flesh the priest took upon himself sin, and thus carried
it.
The corrupt priests saw clearly that the more the
people sinned and the more sin and trespass offerings they brought, the greater
would be the portion coming to them. They went so far as to encourage the
people to sin. Of the corrupt priests it is written: "They eat up the sin of My
people, and they set their heart on their iniquity." Hosea 4:8. This text affirms that
the priests, instead of admonishing the people and urging them to abstain from
sin, "set their
heart on"
the people's iniquity, and hoped they would sin again and come back with
another sin offering. It was to the financial advantage of the priests to
have many sin offerings brought, for each offering added to their income.
As the priesthood became more corrupt, the tendency toward encouraging
the people to bring offerings increased.
An interesting commentary on the length to which some
priests perverted the ordinances is given in the second chapter of First
Samuel: "And the
priests' custom with the people was, that, when any man offered sacrifice, the
priest's servant came, while the flesh was in seething, with a fleshhook of three teeth in his hand; and he struck it into
the pan, or kettle, or caldron, or pot; all that the fleshhook
brought up the priest took for himself. So they did in Shiloh unto all
the Israelites that came thither. Also before they burnt the fat, the
priest's servant came, and said to the man that sacrificed, Give flesh to roast
for the priest; for he will not have sodden flesh of thee, but raw. And
if any man said unto him, Let them not fail to burn the fat presently, and then
take as much as thy soul desireth; then he would
answer him, Nay; but thou shalt give it me now and if not, I will take it by
force." ISam.2:13-16.
This shows the degradation of the priesthood even at
that early period. God had commanded that the fat should be burned on the
altar, and that if the flesh were to be eaten, it should be boiled. The
priests, however, wished to get their meat raw with the fat, so they could
roast it. It had ceased to be to them a sacrificial meal, and had become,
instead, a gluttonous feast. The following commentary is made: "The sin of the young men was
very great before the Lord: for men abhorred the offering of the Lord." 1Sam.2:17.
This tendency of the priests to encourage the people
to bring sin offerings rather than to abstain from sin became more pronounced
as the years went by. In the tabernacle as first erected by Moses, the
altar of burnt offering was quite small, being only five cubits square.
In Solomon's temple the altar was enlarged to twenty cubits, or about
thirty feet on each side. In Herod's temple it was still larger, though
there is no certainty as to the exact size. One account states that it
was thirty cubits or forty-five feet square, and Josephus says it was fifty
cubits or seventy-five feet square. In any case, it appears that the altar
of burnt offering was made larger and larger to accommodate the offerings
placed upon it.
The time finally came when God had to do something,
or the whole temple service would become corrupt. God therefore permitted
the temple to be destroyed, and many of the people were carried into captivity
to Babylon. Deprived of the temple, the services would naturally cease.
The minds of the people would be called to the spiritual significance of
the ordinances which they had so often witnessed, but which now were no more.
In Babylon there was neither burnt offering nor sin offerings nor the
solemn feast of the Day of Atonement. Israel hung their harps on the
willows. After seventy years in captivity, they were permitted by God to
return to their homeland and to build the temple again. He hoped that
they had learned their lesson.
But they had not. The altar of burnt offering
was made larger than before. The people became more firmly settled in
their regard for the mere form and ritual of the temple and its sacrificial
service, and they failed to heed the prophetic message that "to obey is better than
sacrifice." 1Sam.15-22. The income of the priests from
offerings became large; so large, indeed, that the money accumulated in the
temple constituted one of the largest collections of wealth in antiquity, and
the priests became moneylenders.
At feasts such as the Passover, Jerusalem was filled
with visiting Jews from Palestine as well as from other lands. 'We are
told that as many as one million visitors were in the city at one time.
Israel was commanded by God not to appear empty handed before the Lord,
so, of course, all these pilgrims brought offerings. Deut.16:16. It was a physical
impossibility for the priests to offer as many sacrifices as would be required
to accommodate all the people. They were therefore encouraged to convert
their offerings into cash and to leave this cash as temple money with the
priests who would, at their convenience, offer the sacrifice which the money
called for. It was soon found that it was easier and safer not to bring
the sacrificial animal from home. The offerer
ran the risk not only of having the animal rejected by the priest for some
defect, real or supposed, but of incurring an additional loss, for to sell an
animal that had been rejected by the priests was not easy. For some
purposes only temple money could be used, and on this an exchange was charged.
This changing of common money into temple money was another source of
large income to the priesthood. The priests were divided into twenty-four
courses, each one of which was to serve one week at a time, twice a year.
When the office of the high priest became a political one, and he was
appointed by the government, corruption became widespread. Since it was a
very lucrative position, men began to bid for the office of high priest, and it
was actually sold to the highest bidder. To get this money back., the
high priest took control of the selection of the courses; and such priests were
called to serve at Jerusalem at the time of the feasts as could be depended
upon to share with the officials the large revenues contributed at that time.
Corruption came again to prevail, and many were the priests who were
called to serve at the temple at the great feasts only because they were
willing to divide the spoil with the higher officials. The order in which
the priests were to serve was changed, and the entire plan of God corrupted.
Christ's designation later, "a den of thieves," was not a mere poetic
expression; it was literally true.
These conditions did not, of course, obtain
originally. It was only after centuries of transgression that corruption
reached the heights here depicted. It was comparatively early, however,
that abuses began to creep in, as evidenced in the quotation from the book of
Samuel in the earlier part of this chapter. As the priests thus lost
sight of the original intent of offerings, and perverted God's plan in the
sacrifices, it became necessary to send warnings to them. To do this, God
used the prophets. From the very first, the prophets' message to His
people was, "Hath
the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the
voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to
hearken than the fat of rams." 1Sam.15-22. To some of the apostatizing
priests, it seemed a calamity that the people should stop sinning; for in that
case sin offerings would cease. To this the writer of Hebrews refers when
he says: "For
the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the
things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year
continually make the comers thereunto perfect. For then would they not
have ceased to be offered, because that the worshipers once purged should have
had no more conscience of sins." Heb.10:1,2. The Old Testament can be better comprehended when the struggle
between priest and prophet is understood. It was a tragic struggle, which
ended, in many cases, with victory for the priests. The prophet is God's mouthpiece.
The people may go wrong and the priests may go wrong. God, however,
is not left without a witness. Under such circumstances God sends a
prophet to His people to bring them back to the right way. It may easily
be imagined that the prophets were not very popular with the priests. As
the priests served in the temple from day to day, inviting the people to bring
their sacrifices, the prophets would be commanded by God to take their position
near the temple gate and warn the people to bring no more offerings. This is
written of Jeremiah: "The
word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord, saying, Stand in the gate of the
Lord's house, and proclaim there this word, and say, Hear the word of the Lord,
all ye of Judah, that enter in at these gates to worship the Lord. Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, Amend yours
ways and your doings, and I will cause you to dwell in this place. Trust
ye not in lying words, saying, The temple of, the
Lord, The temple of the Lord, The temple of the Lord are these." Jer.7:1-4. After this, follows further
admonition by the prophets for the people to amend their ways and not trust in
lying words. "Will
ye steal, murder, and commit adultery, and swear falsely," says the Lord through the
prophet, "and
come and stand before Me in this house, which is called by My name, and say,
'We are delivered to do all these abominations?" Verses 9-11. Then he adds
significantly, "For
I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought
them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices: but
this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey My voice, and I will be your God, and
ye shall be My people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you,
that it may be well unto you." Verses 22,23. Hear what Isaiah has to say: "To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices
unto Me? saith the Lord: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat
of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of
he-goats. When ye come to appear before Me, who hath required this at
your hand, to tread My courts? Bring no more vain ablations; incense is
an abomination unto Me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies I
cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting. Your new moons
and your appointed feasts My soul hateth; they are a trouble unto Me; I am
weary to bear them. And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide Mine
eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: your hands are
full of blood. Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings
from before Mine eyes; cease to do evil; learn to do well: seek judgment;
relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow." Isa.1:11-17. Note the strong expressions.
"I am full
of the burnt offerings of rams;" "I delight not in the blood of bullocks;" "who hath required this at your
hand?" "bring no more vain
ablations;" "incense
is an abomination to Me;" "your appointed feasts My soul hateth;" "I am weary to bear them;" "I will not hear: your hands are
full of blood." Amos says. "I
hate, I despise your feast days.... Though ye offer Me burnt offerings
and your meat offerings, I will not accept them: neither will I regard the
peace offerings of your fat beasts." Amos 5:21,22.
Micah, in like strain, asks, "Wherewith shall I come before
the Lord, and bow myself before the high God? Shall I come before Him
with burnt offerings, with calves of a year old? Will the Lord be
pleased with thousands of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil?
Shall I give my first-born for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the
sin of my soul?" Micah 6:6,7. He answers the question
in this wise: "He
hath showed thee, 0 man, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee,
but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?" Verse 8. The last prophet in the Old
Testament says: "Now,
0 ye priests, this commandment is for you." "Ye are departed out of the way;
ye have caused many to stumble at the law; ye have corrupted the covenant of
Levi, saith the Lord of hosts. Therefore have I
also made you coni tible and base before all the
people, according as ye not kept My ways, but have been partial in the
law." Mal.2:1,8,9.
David had the right view when he said: "Thou desirest
not sacrifice; else would I give it: Thou delightest
not in burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: and a
broken and a contrite heart, 0 God, Thou wilt not despise." God could hardly have used
stronger words than those in rebuking both the priests and the people, but He
amply justified. The priests had corrupted the covenant. They had
taught the people to sin, and had made them believe that an offering or a
sacrifice would pay for sin. They deserved the rebuke of the Lord which
He brought through His prophets. The results were what might be expected
under the circumstances. A bitter hatred against prophets sprang up among
many of the priests. They hated the men who were sent to rebuke them.
Much of the persecution of the prophets in the Old Testament was carried
on or instigated by the priests. They persecuted them, tortured them, and
killed them. It was not the people alone, but the priests that opposed
and persecuted the prophets.
It was the priests, the scribes, and the Pharisees
who were the constant opposers of Christ. For them Christ reserved His
most scathing rebuke: "Woe
unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the
prophets, and garnish the sepulchers of the righteous, I say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have
been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. Wherefore ye be
witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the
prophets. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. Ye serpents,
generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? Wherefore,
behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes. and some of
them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them ye shall scourge in your
synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: that upon you may come all
the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto
the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew
between the temple and the altar. Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation." Matt.23:29-36.
Christ was a prophet. As such He sounded the
prophetic message: "To
obey is better than sacrifice." "Go, and sin no more," was the way He put it. John 8:11. He annulled the
sacrificial system by offering Himself upon Calvary. Christ personally
did not offer any sacrifices. He did not sin; and by teaching men not to
sin He struck at the very heart of this priestly, perversion. Though
Christ was careful not to offend needlessly, and though He sent the lepers to
the priests for certification. (Luke 17:14), It could not escape the attention of the officials
that Christ was not seen in the temple with the customary offering. They
felt that His message constituted a rebuke to their practices, and were glad
when they found an accusation against Him in His reported words concerning the
temple. Matt.26:61. The priests hated Christ, and
when the time came He followed the long line of noble heroes among the prophets
by giving His life. The priests rejected the prophetic message. It
was they who in reality brought about the crucifixion of Christ. In that,
they filled up the measure of their iniquity. They believed in sacrifices
for sins and that through that provision forgiveness might be had. The
larger message of victory over sin, -- the prophetic message, -- many of the
priests did not understand, or at least did not teach. It is not to be
thought, however, that all the priests were wicked. There were many faithful
men among them. Some of the priests, indeed, were prophets, as Ezekiel.
It was God's intent that every priest should have the prophetic spirit
and sound the prophetic message. In God's plan it is not enough to
attempt to remedy matters after a wrong has been committed. It is far
better to prevent evil than to attempt to heal it. Wonderful as it is to
be lifted up form sin and degradation, it is still more wonderful to be kept
from falling. "Go,
and sin no more" is the true prophetic message. It is better to obey than to
sacrifice. Every true servant of God should echo this message if he would
fulfill the counsel of God. God has always had need of prophets.
They are His messengers to correct wrong. When tendencies appear
among Christ's people that will eventually bring disaster, God sends His
prophets to correct these tendencies and admonish the people. The lesson
for this time should not be lost. The work of the prophet is not done
until the Lord's work in the earth is finished. God wants His ministers to
sound the prophetic message. 'When abuses creep in, a voice must be
lifted, calling the people back to the right ways of the Lord. And back
of every such message must be the clarion call to abstinence from sin, to
sanctification, to holiness. The prophets said: "To obey is better than
sacrifice." Christ said: "Go, and sin no more." Every minister must exemplify this doctrine in his
life and teach it with his lips. To the extent to which he fails to do
this, he comes short of his high privilege. Of all times now is the time
to send the prophetic message to the ends of the earth. This was the
command of Christ when He gave the great gospel commission to teach all nations
and baptize them, "teaching
them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded." Matt.28-20. This command -- to observe all
things -- is parallel to the prophetic message, that to obey is better than
sacrifice. When this work is done the end will come.
THE
CONSECRATION OF AARON
AND HIS SONS
Chapter Five
THE GARMENTS OF THE PRIESTS had
symbolic significance, as indeed had most things about the sanctuary.
Especially was this true of the high priest, who was the embodiment of
the people and represented them. Concerning the garments, this is written:
"These are the
garments which they shall make: a breastplate, and an ephod, and a robe, and a
broidered coat, a miter, and a girdle: and they shall make holy garments for
Aaron thy brother, and his sons, that he may minister unto Me in the priest's
office."
Ex.28:4. Besides these are
mentioned the linen breeches in Lev.16:4 and the holy crown in Ex.29:6; 28:36-38. The breastplate first mentioned was a "foursquare" garment suspended upon the
breast by little chains. In this breastplate were four rows of precious
stones of three each, with the names of the children of Israel engraved upon
them, one name on each stone. Ex.28:21. This garment was called the "breastplate of judgment," and Aaron was to bear it "upon his heart when he goeth in
unto the holy place." Verse 29.
On the breastplate were also said to be the Urim and Thummim, those two mysterious stones which denoted
the Lord's pleasure or displeasure when He was consulted in times of need. Lev.8:8; Ex.28:30; 1Sam.28:6. From the fact that they
are said to be in the breastplate, some have supposed them to be in a pocket
put there for that purpose. It seems better to believe, however, that they were
placed prominently on the breastplate as were the other stones, one on the left
side, the other on the right, in full view.
The ephod was a short garment made "of gold, of blue, and of purple,
of scarlet, and fine-twined linen, with cunning work." Ex.28:6. It had no sleeves, and
hung down both on breast and back. On the shoulder pieces were two onyx stones
with the names of the children of Israel engraved upon them, six names on each
stone. "And
thou shalt put the two stones upon the shoulders of the ephod for stones of
memorial unto the children of Israel: and Aaron shall bear their names before
the Lord upon his two shoulders for a memorial." Ex.28:12.
Underneath the ephod was a long robe made of blue
linen, sleeveless and seamless. Around the skirt upon the hem were
pomegranates of blue, purple, and scarlet "and bells of gold between them round about.... And it
shall be upon Aaron to minister: and his sound shall be heard when he goeth in
unto the holy place before the Lord, and when he cometh out, that he die not." Verses 33-35. Underneath the robe of the ephod was the ordinary white linen coat
of the priests and the linen breeches.
The girdle of the high priest was made of gold,
blue, purple, and scarlet, the same as the ephod; that of the priest of white
linen embroidered in blue, purple, and red. It was placed around the robe
of the ephod, rather high up, and served to hold the garment together. Ex.39:5;29:5.
The priests wore the white linen coat, the breeches,
the girdle, and the miter. The high priest, in addition, wore the ephod,
the robe of the ephod, the breastplate, and the crown upon the miter, besides,
of course, the precious stones with the names of Israel engraved upon them, and
the Urim and Thummim.
Aaron's garments were "for glory and for beauty." Ex.28:2. The ordinary garments of
the priests which he wore underneath his high priestly garments, were symbolic
of inward purity, and were also for utility. The strictly high priestly
garments were for glory and beauty, and were in a special sense symbolic.
The garments which Aaron wore were not of his own
choosing. They were prescribed. They were "holy garments," made by such as "are wisehearted,
whom I have filled with the spirit of wisdom, that they may make Aaron's
garments to consecrate him, that he may minister unto Me in the priest's
office."
Ex.28:3. They harmonized in color
and material with the tabernacle itself, and were adorned with precious stones.
"They shall make the ephod of gold." "The curious girdle of the ephod
which is upon it, shall be of the same." "Thou shalt make the breastplate
of judgment ... of gold." "Thou shalt make the robe of the ephod all of blue ...
and bells of gold." Ex.28:6,
8,15,31,33.
While these garments were made of different materials, gold formed a
prominent part. If to the garments is added the crown of gold upon the
miter, upon which was written: "Holiness to the Lord," the twelve precious stones
with the names of Israel engraved upon them, and the two onyx stones also with
Israel's name upon them, and lastly, Urim and
Thummim, the whole effect must have been one of glory and beauty. As the
high priest would slowly and with dignity move from place to place, the sun's
light would be reflected in the sixteen precious jewels, the bells would give
forth a musical sound, and the people would be deeply impressed with the
solemnity and beauty of God's worship.
The high priest in his official capacity was not
simply a man. He was an institution; he was a symbol; he not merely
represented Israel, he was the embodiment of Israel. He bore the names of
Isreal in the two onyx stones "upon his two shoulders for a
memorial;" he carried them in the twelve precious stones "in the breastplate of judgment
upon his heart;" he bore "the
judgment of the children of Israel upon his heart before the Lord
continually." Ex.28:30. He thus carried Israel
both on his shoulders and on his heart. On his shoulders he carried the
burden of Israel; in the breastplate, signifying the seat of affection and
love--the mercy seat--he carried Israel. In the Urim
and Thummim,--"that
is, the lights and the perfections" (Ex.28:30, R.V., margin),--he bore "the judgments of the children of Israel upon his
heart;"
in the golden crown upon the miter inscribed with "Holiness to the Lord," he bore the "iniquity of the holy things,
which the children of Israel shall hallow in all their holy gifts," and this that "they may be accepted before the
Lord." Verses 36-38.
"The high priest was to act for men 'in things
pertaining to God,' to make propitiation for the sins of the people' (Heb.2:17). He was the mediator who
ministered for the guilty. 'The high priest represented the whole people.
All Israelites were reckoned as being in him. The prerogative held by him
belonged to the whole of them (Ex.19:6),...(Vitringa).' That the high priest did
represent the whole congregation appears, first, from his bearing the tribal
names on his shoulders in the onyx stones, and second, in the tribal names
engraved in the twelve gems of the breastplate. The divine explanation of
this double representation of Israel in the dress of the high priest is, he
'shall bear their names before Jeh upon his two
shoulders for a memorial' (Ex.28:12,19). Moreover, his committing heinous sin involved the people in his
guilt: 'If the anointed priest shall sin so as to bring guilt on the people' (Lev.4:3). The LXX reads, 'If the
anointed priest shall sin so as to make the people sin.' The anointed
priest, of course, is the high priest. 'When he sinned, the people sinned.
His official action was reckoned as their action. The whole nation
shared in the trespass of their representative. The converse appears to be just
as true. What he did in his official capacity, as prescribed by the Lord,
was reckoned as done by the whole congregation: 'Every high priest...is appointed
for men' (Heb.5:1)."
--The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, p.2439.
The representative character of the high priest
should be stressed. Adam was the representative man. When he sinned, the
world sinned, and death passed upon all men. Rom.5:12. "By one man's offense death reigned;" "by one mans disobedience many
were made sinners." Verses 17,
19.
So likewise, Christ being the second man and the
last Adam was the representative man. "It is written, The first man
Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit." "The first man is of the earth,
earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven." 1Cor.15:45, 47. "As by the offense of one
judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one
the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life." Rom.5:18. "For as by one man's disobedience
many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made
righteous." Rom.5:19. "For as in Adam all die, even so in
Christ shall all be made alive." 1Cor.15:22.
The high priest being in a special sense a figure of
Christ, was also the representative man. He stood for all Israel.
He carried their burdens and sins. He bore the iniquity of all the
holy things. He bore their judgment. When he sinned, Israel sinned.
When he made atonement for himself, Israel was accepted.
The consecration of Aaron and his sons to the
priesthood was a most solemn occasion. The first act was that of washing.
"Aaron and
his sons thou shalt bring unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregration, and shalt wash them with water." Ex.29:4. The priests did not wash
themselves. It being a symbolic act, a symbol of regeneration, they could
not wash themselves. Titus
3:5.
Being washed, Aaron was then clothed in his garments
of beauty and glory. "Thou shalt take the garments, and put upon Aaron the coat, and
the robe of the ephod, and the ephod, and the breastplate, and gird him with
the curious girdle of the ephod: and thou shalt put the miter upon his head,
and put the holy crown upon the miter." Ex.29:5, 6. Note again, Aaron did not put his garments
on. They were put on him. As they were symbolic of the robes of righteousness,
he could not clothe himself. "Let tby priests be clothed
with righteousness; and let thy saints shout for joy." Ps.132:9. "I will greatly rejoice in the
Lord, my soul shall be joyful in my God; for He hath clothed me with the
garments of salvation, He hath covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a
bridegroom decketh himself with ornaments, and as a
bride adorneth herself with her jewels." Isa.61:10.
Aaron is now fully clothed. He has on the
white coat underneath, the long blue robe with the bells and the pomegranates,
the ephod with the two beautiful onyx stones with the names of the children of
Israel engraved upon them, the breastplate with the twelve stones and Urim and Thummim, the miter and the golden crown with the
inscription, "Holiness
to the Lord." He is washed, he is clean, he is clothed; but he is
not yet ready to officiate. Next is the anointing. The sacred oil
is poured upon his head by Moses. "Then shalt thou take the anointing oil,
and pour it upon his head, and anoint him." Ex.29:7. Not only is Aaron
anointed, but also the tabernacle. "And Moses took the anointing oil, and anointed the
tabernacle and all that was therein, and sanctified them. And he
sprinkled thereof upon the altar seven times, and anointed the -altar and all
his vessels, both the laver and his foot, to sanctify them." Lev.8:10, 11. This anointing included all
the furniture in both the holy and the most holy place. Ex.30:26-29. It is to be noted that
while the tabernacle and what was therein was sprinkled with oil, upon Aaron
the oil was poured. Lev.8:10-12;
Ex.29:7.
The anointing with oil is symbolic of the endowment
with the Spirit of God. I Sam.10:1,6; 16:13; Isa.61:1; Luke 4:18; Acts 10:38. The profusion of oil
used in the case of Aaron - it "ran down upon the beard, even Aaron's beard: that
went down to the skirts of his garments" - is symbolic of the fullness
of the Spirit which God bestows upon His church. So far, all the
ceremonies-except the washing-have been directed toward Aaron only. Now,
however, the four sons have a part equal with the father in what follows.
A sin offering, a bullock, was provided, and Aaron
and his sons placed their hands upon it and it was killed. The blood was taken
by Moses, who put it "upon
the horns of the altar round about with his finger, and purified the altar, and
poured the blood at the bottom of the altar, and sanctified it, to make
reconciliation upon it." Lev.8:15. It is here to be noted
that the blood of the bullock was not carried into the sanctuary as was the
case when the anointed priest, the high priest, sinned. Lev.4:6. Perhaps
the reason is that this particular sin offering was not for Aaron alone, but
also for his sons, and also that it seems to apply especially to the altar for
its purification and sanctification, that reconciliation might be made upon it.
Lev.8:15. Some, indeed, hold that
it was not for Aaron at all, but only for the altar.
After the sin offering was made, a burnt offering
was provided. This was offered in the regular manner, all being burned on
the altar, from which it came up before the Lord as a sweet savor. Verses 18-21.
The work so far has been preparatory. The
service of consecration proper is begun by bringing "the ram of consecration," or, literally, "the ram of the fillings," and killing it, after hands
had been imposed on its head. The blood is taken by Moses, who puts it "upon the tip of Aaron's right
ear, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right
foot."
Verse 23. The same is done to the sons, and the altar also is sprinkled.
"And he
brought Aaron's sons, and Moses put of the blood upon the tip of their right
ear, and upon the thumbs of their right hands, and upon the great toes of their
right feet: and Moses sprinkled the blood upon the altar round about." Lev.8:24.
After this came the "filling." Unleavened bread, a cake
of oiled bread, and a wafer, together with the fat of the ram and the right
shoulder, are placed in Aaron's hands and upon his sons' hands, and waved for a
wave offering before the Lord. After it is waved by Aaron and his sons,
Moses takes it off their hands and burns it upon the altar. The breast is
reserved for Moses as his part. Verses 26-29.
After this, Moses took the oil and the blood "and sprinkled it upon Aaron, and
upon his garments, and upon his sons, and upon his sons' garments with him; and
sanctified Aaron, and his garments, and his sons, and his sons' garments with
him." Verse 30.
With this ceremony, ended the special consecration
of Aaron and his sons. They were now empowered to officiate at the
sanctuary, though they still had to wait seven days in which they might not
leave the sanctuary, but must "abide at the door of the
tabernacle of the congregation day and night seven days, and keep the charge of
the Lord, that ye die not: for so I am commanded." Verse 35.
So far, Moses had officiated at all the offerings
made. At the end of the seven days Aaron begins his ministration.
He offers a sin offering for himself, a young calf, and a ram for a burnt
offering. Lev.9:2. He also offers a sin
offering, a burnt offering, a meat offering, and a peace offering for the
people. Verses 3,4. At the conclusion of the
offerings, Aaron lifts up his hands and blesses the
people.
Moses joins him in this, and the glory of the Lord
appears. Moses has done his work, and need no longer officiate as priest.
The entire service of consecration tended to impress
upon Aaron and his sons the sacredness of their calling. It must have
been a new experience for Aaron to be washed by Moses. He could hardly
escape the lesson intended by God. As the two brothers proceed to the laver, it
can easily be imagined that they talk over the work about to be done.
Moses informs his brother that he is to wash him. Aaron wonders why
he cannot do this himself. They discuss the situation. Moses informs
Aaron that God has given specific instructions regarding what is to be done. "This is the thing which the Lord
commanded to be done," says Moses. Lev.8:5. From his conversations
with God, Moses has a better understanding of God's requirements than Aaron
has. He understands that this is not an ordinary bath. If it were that,
Aaron could probably do better himself. This is a spiritual cleansing.
He cannot cleanse himself from sin. Somebody must do that for him;
hence, the symbolic washing.
After the washing, Aaron is not permitted to dress
himself. Moses does that for him. Aaron feels himself completely
helpless. Is everything to be done for me? he wonders. Am I not
permitted to do anything for myself? No, he must not even put on the
miter. He is to have everything done for him.
What a wonderful lesson this account teaches!
God does everything. All man has to do is to be submissive.
God cleanses; God clothes. He provides the robe of righteousness,
the garments of glory and beauty. All God asks is that we do not reject
the garment He provides, as the man in the parable did.
In the consecration service Moses touched Aaron's
ear with the blood, signifying by this that he was to hearken to God's
commandments and close his ears to all evil. "To obey is better than
sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams." 1Sam.15:22. Christ was obedient unto
death. Phil.2:8. Our ears are to be
consecrated to God's service.
Moses also touched the thumb of the right hand, signifying
that Aaron should do righteousness. As hearing has to do with the mind,
so the hand has to do with bodily activity. It stands for the life
forces, the outward act, the doing of righteousness. Of Christ it is
written: "Lo, I
come...to do Thy will, O God." Heb.10:7. Christ came to do God's will. "My meat," He said, "is to do the will of Hin that sent Me, and to finish His work." John 4:3. Touching the hand with
the blood means the consecration of the life and service to God -- entire
dedication.
The touching of the toe with the blood has similar
meaning. It signifies walking in the right way, running on God's errands,
standing for truth and uprightness. It signifies treading the path of
obedience, having one's steps ordered by the Lord. Every faculty of the
being is to be dedicated to God and consecrated to His service. The ministry of
God is not to be lightly entered into. It is a fearful responsibility to
act as a mediator between God and men. Such a one must carry the people on
his shoulders, he must bear them on his heart; holiness must be on his
forehead, and his very garments must be sanctified. He must be clean, he
must be anointed with the Holy Spirit, the blood must be applied to his ear,
hand, and foot. The melody of a dedicated life must attend his every
step, his progress must be marked by fruitful happiness, even from afar the
sweet harmony of a well -- ordered life must be evident. He must be quick
to discern God's will in the fleeting sunshine or shadow of God's approval or disapproval;
the gold of worth and obedience must be interwoven in his very character
structure; he must reflect in countenance, dress, and heart the purity, peace,
and love of God. He must be submissive and willing to let God have His
way; he must forget self and think of others; he must not shun a heavy load.
He must continually have in mind that others' welfare and happiness are
depending on him, that he does not live by or for himself, that his every act,
because of his public and official character, has large significance.
As the true minister contemplates the responsibility
resting upon him and the consequences resulting should he fail or come short he
might well cry out, Who is sufficient for these
things?
Chapter Six
OLAH IS THE HEBREW WORD
ordinarily used for burnt offering. It means "that which goes up, or
ascends."
Another word used at times is kallil, which means "whole." The Douay Version has
the word "holocaust," that which is entirely burned
up.
These words describe the burnt offering, which was
wholly burnt on the altar, and of which no part was eaten. Of other
offerings, a part only was burnt on the altar of burnt offering; the rest was
eaten or disposed of in some other way. But in the case of a burnt offering,
the whole animal was consumed in the flames. It "ascended" to God as a sweet-smelling
savor. It was pleasing to God. It signified complete
consecration. Nothing was held back. All was given to God. Lev.1:9,13,17.
The morning and evening sacrifice was called "a continual" offering. It was not
consumed in a moment, but was to burn "upon the altar all night unto
the morning, and the fire of the altar shall be burning in it." Lev.6:9; Ex.29:42. In the daytime the
individual burnt offerings were added to the regular morning sacrifice so that
there was always a burnt sacrifice on the altar. "The fire shall ever be burning
upon the altar: it shall never go out." Lev.6:13.
The individual burnt offerings were voluntary.
Most of the other offerings were mandatory. When, for instance, a
man had sinned, he was to bring a sin offering. He had little choice as
to what to bring. Nearly everything was prescribed. Not so with burnt
offerings. They were voluntary offerings, and the offerer
could bring a bullock, a sheep, a lamb, turtledoves, or pigeons as he thought
best. Lev.1:3,10,14. In this respect they
differed from most of the other sacrifices.
The burnt offerings were perhaps the most important
and characteristic of all offerings. They contained in themselves the
essential qualities and elements of the other sacrifices. Although they
were voluntary, dedicatory offerings, and as such not directly associated with
sin, yet atonement was effected through them. Lev.1:4. Job offered burnt
offerings for his children, for "it may be that my sons have sinned, and cursed God in
their hearts." Job 1:5. They are singled out as "ordained in mount Sinai for a
sweet savor, a sacrifice made by fire unto the Lord." Num.28:6. They were "continual," always to be on the altar. Lev.6:9. Sixteen times in
chapters 28 and 29 of Numbers does God emphasize that no other offering is to
take the place of the continual burnt offerings. Each time another
sacrifice is mentioned, it is stated that this is "beside the continual burnt
offering." This would seem to indicate their importance.
As stated, the burnt offering was a voluntary
sacrifice. The offerer could bring any clean
animal ordinarily used for sacrifice. It was required, however, that the
animal be a male without blemish. The person was to offer "of his own voluntary will at the
door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the Lord." Lev.1:3. When he had selected the
animal, he brought it into the court for acceptance. The priest examined
it to see if it complied with the regulations for sacrifices. After it
had been examined and accepted, the offerer would put
his hand upon the head of the animal. He would then kill the animal, flay
it, and cut it into pieces. Verses 4-6. As the animal was killed, the priest caught the blood, and
sprinkled it round about the altar. Verses 5, 11. After the animal had been cut into pieces,
the inwards and legs were washed in water, that all filth might be removed.
After this, the priest took the pieces and put them in their proper order
upon the altar of burnt offering, there to be consumed by the fire. Verse 9. The sacrifice thus
placed on the altar included all the parts of the animal, both the head, the
feet, the legs, and the body itself, but did not include the skin. This was given
to the officiating priest. Lev.1:8;7:8.
In case turtledoves or young pigeons were used, the
priest did the killing by wringing off the head, and sprinkling or wringing the
blood out at the side of the altar. After this, the body of the bird was
placed on the altar and was there consumed as the ordinary burnt offering, the
feathers and the crop being first removed. Lev.1:15,16.
Burnt offerings were used on many occasions, such as
the cleansing of lepers (Lev.14:19,20), the cleansing of women after childbirth (Lev.12:6-8), and also
for ceremonial defilement. Lev.15:15,30. In these cases a sin offering was used as well as a burnt
offering. The first atoned for sin, the second showed the offerer's attitude toward God in wholehearted consecration.
The burnt offering was prominent in the consecration
of Aaron and his sons (Ex.29:15-25;
Lev.8:18),
as well as in their induction into the ministry. Lev.9:12-14. It was also used in
connection with the Nazarite vow. Num.6:14. In all these instances it stood for complete
consecration of the individual to God. The offerer
placed himself symbolically on the altar, his life wholly devoted to God.
It is not hard to see the connection between these
ceremonies and the statement made in Romans 12:1, "I beseech you therefore,
brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living
sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service." We are to be wholly dedicated
to God. We are to be perfect. Only when all filth was removed from
the burnt offering was it acceptable to God and was it permitted to come upon
the altar, an "offering
made by fire, for a sweet savor" unto the Lord. So
with us. All sin, all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, must be removed
before we can be acceptable to God. 2Cor.7:1.
As an offering wholly consumed on the altar, the
burnt sacrifice in a special sense represents Christ who gave Himself fully,
completely, to God's service. In thus representing Christ, it constitutes
an example to man to follow in His steps. It teaches complete
consecration. It is rightly placed first in the list of offerings enumerated in
Leviticus. It tells us in no uncertain tones that, to be a "sweet savor" unto God, a sacrifice must be
one of entire surrender. All must be put on the altar. Nothing must
be held back.
In the burnt sacrifice we are taught that God is no
respecter of persons. The poor man who brings his two turtledoves is just
as acceptable as the rich man who brings an ox, or as Solomon, who offered a thousand
burnt offerings. 1Kings
3:4.
The two mites are as pleasing to God as the abundance of the wealthy.
According to his ability each is accepted.
Another lesson from the burnt offering is that of
order. God wants order in His work. He gives specific directions
regarding this. The wood is to be laid "in order upon the fire," not merely piled up. The
pieces of the animal are to be laid "in order on the wood," not just thrown somewhere on
the fire. Lev.1:7,8,12. Order is heaven's first
law. "God
is not the author of confusion." He wants His people to do things "decently and in order." 1Cor.14:33,40.
Another important lesson is that of cleanliness.
Before the pieces were burned on the altar, "his inwards and his legs" were to be washed in water. Verse 9. This would seem
unnecessary. These pieces were to be consumed on the altar. It
would be merely a waste of time to wash them before burning them. Such,
however, is not God's reasoning. The command is, Wash each piece; nothing
unclean must come on the altar. And so the pieces are washed and
carefully laid in order on the wood, which is laid in order on the altar.
Three elements of purification are used in the
service: fire, water, and blood. Fire, emblematic of the Holy Spirit, is
a purifying agency. When Christ comes "to His temple" He is "like a refiner's fire." "And He shall sit as a refiner
and purifier of silver: and He shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as
gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness." Mal.3:2,3. He shall purge His
people by the "spirit
of burning." Isa.4:4.
The question is asked: "Who among us shall dwell with
the devouring fire? who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings?" Isa.33:14. "Our God is a consuming
fire." Heb.12:29. The fire is God's
presence, which consumes or purifies.
The fire on the altar was not common fire. It
came originally from God. "There came a fire out from before the Lord, and
consumed upon the altar the burnt offering and the fat: which when all the
people saw, they shouted, and fell on their faces." Lev.9:24. God had accepted their
sacrifice. It was clean, washed, and "in order," ready for the fire; and the fire came "out from before the Lord." It is supposed that this fire
was always kept burning and not permitted to go out; and as it had come from
God it was called sacred as opposed to common fire, and was to be used in the
Levitical service.
Water is emblematic both of baptism and of the word,
two cleansing agencies. "Christ also loved the church, and gave
Himself for it; that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water
by the word." Eph.5:25,26. "According to His mercy He saved
us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; which He
shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." Titus 3:5,6. Paul was told to "be baptized, and wash away thy
sins." Acts 22:16. When the pieces of the animal used
as a burnt offering were washed before being put on the altar, it not only
taught the people order and cleanliness, but also the spiritual lesson that
before anything is placed on the altar, before it is accepted by God, it must
be clean, washed, pure, holy.
In the burnt offering, -- as in all offerings,-- the blood was the vital, the important element.
It is that which makes atonement for the soul. The classical
passage dealing with this is found in Leviticus 17:11. "The life of the flesh is in the
blood; and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your
souls: for it is the blood that maketh atonement by reason of the life." Lev.17:11, R.V.
The life of the flesh is in the blood. It is
the blood that makes atonement "by reason of the life." When the blood was
sprinkled on the altar and the fire came down and consumed the sacrifice, it
indicated God's acceptance of the substitute. "It shall be accepted for
him," or
instead of him, "to
make atonement for him." Lev.1:4. This atonement was made "by reason of the life" that was in the blood. But
this blood, which represented the life, was efficacious only after the death of
the victim. Had God intended to convey the idea that it was the blood as
such that was efficacious without death, He would have so stated. A
certain amount of blood could have been withdrawn from an animal without
killing it-as blood is now given in blood transfusions. Blood could thus
have been provided without death.
But this is not God's plan. The blood was not
used until death had ensued. And it is the blood of one who has died.
A death has taken place, and it is not until after death that the blood
is used. We are reconciled by Christ's death, we are saved by His life. Rom.5:10. It was not until Christ
was dead that there flowed out blood and water. John 19:34. Christ "came by water and blood, . . .
not by water only, but by water and blood." 1John 5:6. The point cannot be
emphasized too strongly that it is "by means of death" that we receive the promise of
eternal inheritance, and that a testament is not of force until "after men are dead," that "it is of no strength at all
while the testator liveth," and that "there must also of necessity be the death of the
testator." Heb.9:15-17. We may therefore dismiss
any theory of atonement which makes Christ's example the sole factor in our
salvation. The example has its place; it is vital indeed, but the death
of Christ remains the central fact in the atonement.
The burnt sacrifice, "an offering made by fire," "was a sweet savor unto the
Lord." Lev.1:17. It pleased the Lord.
It was acceptable to Him. Some of the reasons for this have been
given. They will now be emphasized.
As the burnt sacrifice was first and foremost a type
of the perfect offering of Christ, it is natural that it should be pleasing to
God. As the sacrifice must be without blemish, perfect, so Christ was the
"Lamb without
blemish and without spot," who has "loved us, and hath given Himself for us, an offering
and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling savor." 1 Peter 1-19; Eph.5:2. Christ stands for
complete consecration, entire dedication, full surrender, a giving of all, that
He might save some.
The burnt sacrifice was pleasing to God because it
revealed a desire in the heart of the offerer to
dedicate himself to God. The offerer said in
effect: "Lord, I
want to serve Thee. I am placing myself unreservedly on the altar.
I am holding back nothing for myself. Accept me in the
substitute." Such an attitude is a sweet savor unto the Lord.
The burnt sacrifice was a sweet savor to God because
it was a voluntary offering. It was not required. It was not
mandatory and was not to be brought at a stated time. If a man had
sinned, God demanded a sin offering. But God never demanded a burnt
sacrifice. If a man offered it, it was "of his own voluntary will." Lev.1:3. There was no compulsion.
It was therefore of much more significance than a mandatory offering.
It indicated a thankful heart.
There is danger that Christians do too many things
pertaining to religion not because they wish to do them, but because it is the
custom or because it is required. Duty is a great word; love is a
greater. We must not minimize duty; rather, we must emphasize it. But we
must not forget that love is a still greater force, and that rightly understood
and applied it fulfills duty because it includes it. Love is voluntary,
free; duty is exacting, compulsory. Duty is law; love is grace.
Both are necessary, and one must not be stressed to the exclusion of the
other.
As there was no compulsion whatever concerning the burnt
sacrifice, it was in reality an offering of love, of dedication, of
consecration. It was something done over and above what was required.
This was pleasing to God.
"God loveth a cheerful giver." 2Cor.9:7. Some read this as though
it said, God loveth a liberal, or a large, giver. While that may be true,
the statement nevertheless is that God loves one who gives cheerfully and of
his free will. The gift may be small or great, but if it is offered
willingly, it is pleasing to God.
It would be well to apply this principle to everyday
Christianity. We may be asked to do a certain thing, give to a certain
cause, or perform a not-too-pleasing task. We do it, at times resignedly,
believing that as it is in itself a good thing, perhaps we ought to do it, but
we are not very cheerful about it. We feel we ought to do it, but we
would be glad to be excused.
God must be displeased with the attitude we assume
at times. He sends one of His ministers with a message. We are
admonished to give, to do, to sacrifice, to pray. There is no cheerful
response to the appeal. Again and again it must be repeated, and at last
we halfheartedly do what we are asked to do. We
put ten cents or ten dollars on the collection plate, not because we really
care to do so, but because we would be ashamed to have others see that we have
no part in the offering. We do our share in Ingathering for missions, not
because we love to do the work, but because it is part of the church program.
It was doubtless because David was cheerful and
willing that he was beloved of God. He had sinned, and sinned grievously,
but he repented as deeply as he had sinned, and God forgave him. The
experience left a vivid impression upon David's mind, and ever after, he was
anxious to please God and do something for Him.
It was this spirit that led him to propose the
building of a temple for God to dwell in. The tabernacle erected in the
wilderness was several hundred years old. The material of which it was
made must have been in a dilapidated condition. God would have been
pleased to have some one build Him a temple; but He decided not to let His
wishes be known, but to wait until some one thought of it himself. This
David did, and felt happy in the thought that he could do something for God. He
was not permitted to build the temple, but in appreciation of what David had in
mind to do, God told him that instead of David's building God a house, God
would build David a house. 1Chron.17:6-10. It was in this connection that God gave him the promise that his
throne should be "established
forevermore." Verse 14. This finds its
fulfillment in Christ, who, when He comes, shall sit upon "the throne of His father
David." Luke 1:32. This is a most wonderful
and unusual promise. Abraham, Moses, and Elijah are passed by, and the
honor is given to David. One reason for this, we believe, is found in the
willingness of David to do something for God over and above what is required.
This is strikingly illustrated in David's wish to
build the temple. As stated before, God had told him that he could not
build the temple. David, however, greatly desired to do so. As he
thought the matter over, he found several ways of making preparation for the
building, without doing the actual building himself. David said, "Solomon my son is young and
tender, and the house that is to be builded for the
Lord must be exceeding magnifical, of fame and of
glory throughout all countries; I will therefore now make preparation for it.
So David prepared abundantly before his
death." 1Chron.22:5.
The first thing David did was to begin to gather
money. The figures given in 1Chron.22:14. total many million dollars in our money, which
David gave or collected. Next he began "to hew wrought stones to build
the house of God." 1Chron.22:2. David also "prepared iron in abundance for
the nails for the doors of the gates, and for the joinings;
and brass in abundance without weight." Verse 3. Before he could do any of this, however, it was necessary for him
to have a pattern, or blueprint. This pattern, David tells us, he
received from the Lord. "All this, said David, the Lord made me understand in writing by
His hand upon me, even all the works of this pattern." I 1Chron.28:19. We can almost imagine
David's saying to the Lord, "Lord, Thou hast told me that I may not build the temple. I would
so much like to do this, but I am content to abide by Thy decision. May I
make a pattern? That would not be building, would it, Lord?" So the Lord helped him
make a pattern, being pleased with David's willingness to do something for Him.
In this connection there is an interesting statement
in 1st Chronicles 28:4: "Howbeit the Lord God of Israel chose me before all the house of
my father to be king over Israel forever: for He hath chosen Judah to be the
ruler; and of the house of Judah, the house of my father; and among the sons of
my father He liked me to make me king over all Israel." This unique expression
shows God's high regard for David. And so David got permission to prepare
the stone, the timber, and the iron for the temple of the Lord, as well as the
plan itself. This may be the reason why later, in the erection of the
temple, the sound of a hammer was not heard. David had prepared the
material beforehand.
David, however, was not satisfied with making
preparation for the building of the temple. He wanted also to prepare the music
for the dedication. That was not building, and so he felt free to go ahead.
David was the sweet singer in Israel; he loved music with his whole
heart. So David began to prepare for the occasion by gathering together a
band of four thousand who "praised the Lord with the instruments which I made, said David,
to praise therewith." 1Chron.23:5. He also brought the singers
together and trained them, as recorded in the twenty-fifth chapter of the same
book. It is pleasing to think of David after the sad experience of his
life, passing a few years in peace and contentment, making preparation for
building the temple of the Lord and training the singers and musicians for its
dedication.
Still David was not satisfied. The Lord had
told him that he could not build the temple, but that his son Solomon should do
so. 'What would hinder David from abdicating and making his son Solomon
king of Israel? "So
when David was old and full of days, he made Solomon his son king over
Israel."
1Chron.23:1. Though there were
political reasons for doing this, the setting of the statement indicates that
the building of the temple was a vital factor.
No wonder God liked David. He kept pressing God to
be permitted to do more for Him. He thought up the plan of making
preparation for building the temple. He collected unheard of sums of
money; he trained the musicians, -- all that he might do something for God, who
had done so much for him. David was a cheerful giver of money and of
service, and God liked him. We do not know how long David lived after
Solomon became king, but when he did die, "they made Solomon the son of David king the second
time." 1Chron.29:22.
Would that we had more men and churches like David,
willing to sacrifice and work, and anxious to do still more! There would
then be no more need of urging the people or the churches to arise and finish
the work. If David were here and were asked to give $10, he would
doubtless ask: "May
I not give $20 or $100?" And the Lord would be pleased, and would say,
"Yes, David, you may." It was because of this
spirit that David, in spite of his sin, was chosen to be the earthly father of
Christ. It was the same spirit that led Christ to give willingly, to
suffer all, and at last to make the supreme sacrifice. God loves a cheerful
giver.
MEAT
OR MEAL OFFERINGS
Chapter Seven
THE WORD USED IN HEBREW for "meat offering" is minchah. It means a gift made to another, usually to a
superior. When Cain and Abel presented their offerings to God as recorded
in Genesis 4:3,4, it was a minchah they offered. So also
was Jacob's gift to Esau. Gen.32:13. It was a minchah, which the brothers of Joseph presented to him in
Egypt. Gen.43:11. The name given to these
offerings in the King James Version is "meat offering." More nearly correct
would be the name "meal
offering," as used in the American Revised Version. This designation we shall
use hereafter.
The meal offerings consisted of such vegetable
products as constituted the chief food supply of the nation: flour, oil, corn
or grain, wine, salt, and frankincense. When they were presented to the Lord, a
part was burned as a memorial upon the altar as a sweet savor unto the Lord.
In the case of a burnt offering, all was consumed on the altar. In
the meal offering, only a small part was placed upon the altar; the rest
belonged to the priest. "It is a thing most holy of the offerings of Jehovah made by
fire." Lev.2:3,A.R.V. As the burnt offering
signified consecration and dedication, so the meal offering signified
submission and dependence. The burnt offerings stood for entire surrender
of a life; the meal offerings were an acknowledgment of sovereignty and stewardship;
of dependence upon a superior. They were an act of homage to God, and a
pledge of loyalty.
Meal offerings were ordinarily used in connection
with burnt offerings and peace offerings, but not with those of sin or
trespass. The record in the fifteenth chapter of Numbers states: "Speak unto the children of
Israel, and say unto them, When ye be come into the land of your habitations,
which I give unto you, and will make an offering by fire unto the Lord, a burnt
offering, or a sacrifice in performing a vow, or in a freewill offering, or in
your solemn feasts, to make a sweet savor unto the Lord, of the herd, or of the
flock: then shall he that offereth his offering unto
the Lord bring a meat offering of a tenth deal of flour mingled with the fourth
part of a hin of oil. And the fourth part of a hin of wine for a drink offering shalt thou prepare with
the burnt offering or sacrifice, for one lamb." Num.15:2-5. When a ram was offered,
the meal offering was increased to two tenths of a deal of flour; and when a
bullock was sacrificed, the meal offering was three tenths of a deal. The drink
offerings were increased accordingly. Verses 6-10.
When the meal offering consisted of fine flour, it
was mingled with oil, and frankincense placed upon it. Lev.2:1. A handful of this flour
with oil and frankincense was burned as a memorial upon the altar of burnt
offerings. It was "an
offering made by fire, of a sweet savor unto the Lord." Lev.2:2. Whatever was left after the handful had
been placed upon the altar, belonged to Aaron and his sons. It was "a thing most holy of the
offerings of the Lord." Verse 3.
When the offering consisted of unleavened cakes or
wafers, it was to be made of fine flour mingled with oil, cut in pieces and oil
poured on it. Verses
4-6.
At times it was baked in a frying pan. Verse 7. When it was thus
presented, the priest took a part and burned it upon the altar for a memorial. Verses 8,9. What was left of the
wafers belonged to the priests and was counted most holy. Verse 10.
It seems evident that the offering of flour and
unleavened wafers anointed with oil was meant to teach Israel that God is the
sustainer of all life, that they were dependent on Him for daily food; and that
before partaking of the bounties of life they were to acknowledge Him as the
giver of all. This acknowledgment of God as the provider of temporal
blessings would naturally lead their minds to the source of all spiritual
blessings. The New Testament reveals this source as the Bread sent down
from heaven which gives life to the world. John 6:33.
It is specifically stated that no meal offering
should be made with leaven. Neither it nor honey might come upon the
altar. Lev.2:11. Yet permission was given
to offer both leaven and honey as first fruits. When so used, they were
not to come on the altar, however.Verse 12. Leaven is a symbol of
sin. For this reason it was forbidden in any offering made by fire.
The question might properly be raised as to why
leaven and honey, forbidden with other sacrifices, might be offered as first
fruits. Lev.2:12. While leaven is symbolic
of sin, of hypocrisy, malice, wickedness (Luke 12:1; 1Cor.5.8), there is no direct statement in the Bible as to
the symbolic meaning of honey. Commentators are generally agreed,
however, that honey stands for those sins of the flesh which are pleasant to
the senses, but which nevertheless corrupt. Many therefore consider honey
symbolic of self-righteousness or self-seeking.
If we accept this interpretation, we would
understand that when God says that Israel might bring leaven and honey as a
first fruit, He invites us, when we first come, to bring all our sinful
tendencies and cherished worldliness to Him. He wants us to come just as
we are. While God is not pleased with sin and it is not a sweet savor to
Him, and while its symbol, leaven, must not come on the altar, God does want us
to come to Him with all our sin and self-righteousness. Having come, we
are to lay all at His feet. He wants us to bring our sins to Him.
Then we are to go and sin no more.
In the meal offerings, as in other offerings, salt
was used. It is called the "salt of the covenant of thy God." "With all thine offerings thou
shalt offer salt." Lev.2:13. All sacrifices were
salted, both animal and vegetable. "Every one shall be salted with fire, and every
sacrifice shall be salted with salt." Mark 9:49. Salt has preserving power. It also makes food
palatable. It was a vital part of each sacrifice. It is symbolic of
the preserving, keeping power of God.
When bringing a meal offering of first fruits, "green ears of corn dried by the
fire, even corn beaten out of full ears," it could be used. "Thou shalt put oil upon it, and
lay frankincense thereon." A memorial part was taken by the priest and
burned on the altar of burnt offering. Lev.2:14-16. The American Revised Version, instead of "corn beaten out of full
ears,"
translates: "bruised
grain of the fresh ear." Though we are not to find a hidden meaning in every expression, it
does not seem farfetched to believe that the bruised corn here typifies Him who
was bruised for us, and by whose stripes we are healed. Isa.53:5. The meal offerings present Christ
to us as the life-giver and up-holder, the one through and in whom "we live, and move, and have our
being." Acts 17:28.
To the meal offerings also belongs the libation of
wine mentioned as the drink offering. Num.15:10, 24. This drink offering of wine was presented
before the Lord and poured out in the holy place, though not on the altar. Num.28:7; Ex.30:9.
The wave sheaf offered as the first fruit of the
harvest, which was to be waved before the Lord on the second day of the
Passover, was also a meal offering. Lev.23:10-12. Another meal offering was the two wave loaves
baked with leaven presented at Pentecost as a first fruit unto the Lord. Lev.23:17-20. Other offerings were the
daily meal offering of Aaron and his sons, which was to be a perpetual offering
(Lev.6:20), and the offering of jealousy
recorded in Numbers 5:15. There was also an offering which is recorded
in Leviticus 5:11&12. This offering, however, was a sin offering
rather than a meal offering.
The shewbread placed weekly on the table in the
first apartment of the sanctuary was in reality a meal offering presented to
the Lord. Its Hebrew name means the "bread of the Presence," or "bread of the face." It is also called the "continual bread." Num.4:7. The table is called the table of
the shewbread, and the "pure
table." Lev.24:6; 2Chron.13:10,11. The shewbread consisted
of twelve loaves, each made out of four fifths of a
peck of fine flour. The loaves were placed in two piles on the table
every Sabbath. The incoming priests who were to officiate during the
coming week began their work with the evening sacrifice on the Sabbath.
The outgoing priests finished theirs with the Sabbath morning sacrifice.
Both the outgoing and the incoming priests joined in the removal of the
shewbread and in its placement. While the outgoing priests removed the old
bread, the incoming priests put the new bread on. They were careful not
to remove the old until the new was ready to be put on. The bread must
always be on the table. It was the "bread of the Presence."
As to the size of the loaves there is a difference
of opinion. Some believe them to have been as large as twenty by forty
inches. While this cannot be substantiated, it is clear that four fifths
of a peck of flour--which is equivalent to two tenths of an ephah and which was
used for each cake would make a sizable loaf. On this bread, incense was placed
in two cups, a handful of incense in each. When the bread was changed on the
Sabbath, this incense was carried out and burned on the altar of burnt
offering.
The "bread of the Presence" was offered to God under "an everlasting covenant." Lev.24:8. It was an ever-present
testimony that Israel was dependent upon God for sustenance, and a constant
promise from God that He would sustain them. Their need was ever before
Him, and His promise constantly before them.
The record concerning the table of shewbread reveals
that there were dishes on the table, spoons, covers, bowls, or as the American
Revised Version states, dishes, spoons, flagons, and bowls "wherewith to pour out." Ex.25:29. While in this connection
nothing is said of wine's being on the table, it is evident that the flagons
from which "to
pour out"
were there for a purpose. There was a drink offering of wine commanded in
connection with the daily sacrifice. Num.28:7. The wine was "to be poured unto the Lord for a
drink offering" "in the
holy place." The record does not reveal were in the holy place the wine is to
be poured, but only that it is to be "poured unto the Lord." We are, however, told
where it is not to be poured out. As to the altar of incense, Israel was
forbidden to offer "strange
incense"
on it, "neither
shall ye pour drink offering thereon." Ex.30:9. If the drink offering was to be poured in the holy place; if it
was not to be poured on the altar; if there were flagons on the table from
which "to pour
out," it
seems clear that the flagons on the table contained wine.
It is not a long step from the table of shewbread in
the Old Testament to the table of the Lord in the New Testament. Luke 22:30; 1Cor.10:21. The parallel is
close. The bread is His body, broken for us. The cup is the New
Testament in His blood. 1Cor.11:24,25. As often as we eat the bread and drink the cup, we "do show the Lord's death till He
come." Verse 26. "The Lord of the Presence" is symbolic of the Wine, who
ever liveth "to
make intercession for us." Heb.7:25. He is the "living
bread which came down from heaven." John 6:51.
As stated at the beginning of this juncture, the
meal offerings were an acknowledgment of God's sovereignty and man's
stewardship. The burnt offerings said: All that I am is the Lord's.
The meal offerings said: All that I have is the Lord's. The latter is
really included in the former; for when a man is dedicated to God, that
dedication includes his possessions as well as himself. That is doubtless
the reason the meal offerings always accompanied the burnt offering. Num.15:4.
The meal offering is a definite and separate
sacrifice denoting a consecration of means, as the burnt sacrifice denotes a
consecration of life. The dedication of means must be preceded by a
dedication of life. One is the result of the other. A dedication of
life without a dedication of means is not provided for in God's plan. A
dedication of means without a dedication of life is not acceptable. The
two must go together. Combined, they form a complete sacrifice, pleasing
to God, "a sweet
savor unto the Lord."
The idea of stewardship needs emphasis in a time
like this. Some who bear the name of Christian talk loudly of holiness and of
their devotion to God, but their works do not always correspond to their
profession. The purse strings are held tight, appeals go unheeded, God's
cause languishes. Such need to understand that consecration of life
includes consecration of means, and that the one without the other is not
pleasing to God.
On the other hand it would be misleading to believe
that a dedication of means is all that God requires. We are responsible
for whatever talents we may have, whether they be money or time or natural
gifts. Of all these God is the rightful owner, and we only stewards.
Such talents as music, song, art, speech, leadership, belong to God. They
must be dedicated to Him. They must be put on the altar.
The fine flour used in the meal offering was partly
the product of man's labor. God causes the grain to grow; He gives sunshine
and rain; He places the life-giving properties within the kernel. Man
harvests the grain, grinds the flour, separates all coarse particles from it
until it becomes "fine." It is then presented to
God, either as flour or as cakes prepared by baking. God and man have
cooperated, and the resulting product is dedicated to God. It represents
God's original gift plus man's labor. It is a giving back to God of His
own with usury. God gives the seed. Man plants it, God waters it.
Multiplied, it is given back to God, who graciously accepts it. It is symbolic
of man's lifework, of his talents as improved under the guiding hand of God.
God gives to every man at least one talent. He
expects man to improve that talent and multiply it. It is not acceptable
to God to present Him with the original talent, to give back to Him only that
which He gave us. He wants us to take the seed He gives, plant it, tend
it, harvest it. He wants the grain to pass through the process that seems
to crush the very life out of it, but in reality prepares it to serve man; He
wants everything coarse removed from it, and He wants it presented to Him as "fine flour." He wants the talents
improved and presented to Him with usury. Nothing less will do.
The fine flour stands for man's lifework. It
stands for improved talents. What the shewbread signified with respect to
the nation, the meal offering signified with respect to the individual.
It is consecrated lifework symbolized.
How significant is the expression "fine flour"! Flour is grain, crushed
between the upper and nether millstone. It was grain, capable of being
planted, capable of life perpetuation. Now it is crushed, lifeless.
It can never be planted again; it is dead. The life is crushed out of it.
But is it useless? No, a thousand times no! it gives its life, it
dies, that others might live. The crushing of its own life became the
means through life is perpetuated, ennobled. It was the life of the seed;
now it helps to sustain the life of the soul, a being made in the image of
God. Death enriched it, glorified it, made it serviceable to mankind.
Few lives are of real and enduring value to mankind
until they are bruised and crushed. It is in the deep experiences of life
that men find God. It is when the waters go over the soul that character is
built. Sorrow, disappointment, and suffering are able servants of
God. They are the dark days that bring the showers of blessing, enabling
the seed to germinate and to bring forth fruit.
The problem of suffering may be unfathomable in its
deeper aspects. But some things are clear. Suffering serves a
definite purpose in the plan of God. It mellows the spirit. It
prepares the soul for a deeper understanding of life. It inspires
sympathy for others. It makes one walk softly, before God and men.
Only he who has suffered has lived. Only he
who has loved has lived. The two are inseparable. Love calls for
sacrifice. Sacrifice often requires suffering. Not that it need
necessarily be physical suffering. For the highest kind of suffering is
joyful, holy, exalted. A mother may sacrifice for her child, she may
suffer, but she does it willingly, joyfully. Love counts sacrifice a
privilege. I "rejoice
in my suffering for you," Paul says, "and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions
of Christ in my flesh for His body's sake, which is the church." Col.1:24. The lesson of suffering
has not been learned until we know how to rejoice in it. And we may
rejoice, when it dawns on us that "as the suffering of Christ abound in us, so our
consolation also aboundeth by Christ;" that when we are "afflicted, it is for your
consolation and salvation;" that Christ Himself "learned...obedience by the
things which He suffered;" and that because He "hath suffered being tempted, He is
able to succor them that are tempted;" when it dawns on us that our sufferings rightly
endured and interpreted are permitted that we, as the high priest of old, may "have compassion on the ignorant,
and on them that are out of the way; for that he himself also is compassed with
infirmity." 2Cor.l:5,6;
Heb.5:8;2:18;5:2. Such suffering is not sorrowful, but happy. Christ, "for the joy that was set before
Him, endured the cross." Heb.12:2.
Suffering has been the lot of God's people at all
times. It is part of God's plan. Only through suffering can certain
lessons be learned. Only thus can we in Christ's stead minister as we should to
those who are passing through the valley of affliction and "be able to comfort them which
are in any trouble, by the comfort wherewith we ourselves are comforted of
God." 2Cor.1:4. Viewed in this light,
suffering becomes a blessing. It enables one to minister in a way not
possible without such experience. It becomes a privilege "not only to believe on Him, but
also to suffer for His sake." Phil.1:29.
To understand how necessary is "the fellowship of His
suffering," we need but glance at the experience of some of the saints of God in
past ages. Call to mind those three awful days for Abraham after God had told
him to slay his son. Call to mind the night of Jacob's trouble--the night
that made a saint out of a sinner. Call to mind the time Joseph spent
awaiting death in the cistern; his agony at being sold as a slave; his prison
experience caused by false accusations and embittered by ingratitude.
Call to mind the persecutions of Jeremiah; the fearful day when Ezekiel was
commanded to preach, instead of being permitted to stay with his dying wife;
the dark and awful experience of John the Baptist in prison when doubt assailed
his soul; the thorn in Paul's flesh which he was not permitted to have
removed. And yet from all these experiences issued nobler lives, larger
vision, greater usefulness. Without them these saints could never have
done the work they did, nor would their lives have been the inspiration they
now are. As the flowers give more delightful fragrance when they are
crushed, so a great sorrow may ennoble and beautify a life, sublimating it for
God's use.
The flour used in meal offerings was not to be
offered dry; it was to be mingled with oil, or anointed with oil. Lev.2:4,5. The oil is the Spirit of
God. Only as a life is sanctified by the Spirit, mixed with it, anointed
with it, can it be pleasing to God. Suffering in and of itself may not be
a blessing. It may only lead to hardness of heart, bitterness of
spirit. But as God's Spirit takes possession of the soul, as the sweet
spirit of the Master permeates the life, the fragrance of a dedicated life
becomes manifest.
As the incense offered each morning and evening in
the holy place was emblematic of the righteousness of Christ which ascended
with the prayers of the priest for the nation as a sweet savor unto God, so the
incense offered in connection with each meal offering was efficacious for the
individual. It was making a personal application of that which otherwise
was only general. In the morning and evening sacrifice, the priest prayed
for the people. In the meal offering the incense was applied to the
individual soul.
In the minds of the Israelites, incense and prayer
were closely associated. Morning and evening, as the incense--symbolizing
Christ's merits and intercession--ascended in the holy place, prayers were
offered throughout the nation. Not only did the incense permeate the holy
and the most holy place, but its fragrance was noted far around the
tabernacle. Everywhere it bespoke prayer and called men to communion with
God.
Prayer is vital to Christianity. It is the
breath of the soul. It is the vital element in every activity of
life. It must accompany every sacrifice, make fragrant every
offering. It is not only an important ingredient of Christianity, it is
the very life of it. Without its vital breath, life soon ceases; and with
the cessation of life, decomposition sets in, and that which should be a savor
of life unto life becomes a savor of death unto death.
"Every one shall be salted with fire, and every
sacrifice shall be salted with salt." Mark 9:49. Fire purifies, salt preserves. To be salted with fire means
not only purification, but preservation. God wants a clean people, a
people whose sins are forgiven. But it is not enough to be forgiven and
cleansed. The keeping power of God must be accepted. We must be
kept clean. The fire is not to be a destructive fire, but a cleansing
one. We are to be first cleansed, then kept. "Salted with fire!" "Salted with salt!" Purified and kept
pure! Wonderful provision!
The meal offering, though not the most important
one, has beautiful lessons for the devout soul. All we are should be on
the altar. All we have belongs to God. And God will purify and keep
His own. May these lessons abide with us.
Chapter Eight
THE HEBREW WORD TRANSLATED "PEACE offering," comes from a root word meaning
"to make up, to supply
what is wanting, to pay a recompense." It denotes a state in which misunderstandings
have been cleared up and wrongs righted, and in which good feeling
prevails. Peace offerings were used on any occasion that called for
thankfulness and joy, and also in making a vow. They were sweet-savor
offerings, like burnt and meal offerings. They were an expression on the
part of the offerer, of his peace with God and of his
thankfulness to Him for His many blessings.
In selecting a peace offering, the offerer was not limited in his choice. He could use a
bullock, a sheep, a lamb, or a goat, male or female. Ordinarily a
sacrifice had to be "perfect
to be accepted." Lev.22:21;
3:1-17.
However, when a peace offering was presented as a freewill offering, it need
not be perfect. It could be used even if it had "anything superfluous or lacking
in his parts." Lev.22:23. As in the case of the
burnt offering, the offerer must lay his hands upon
the head of the sacrifice and kill it at the door of the tabernacle. The
blood was then sprinkled upon the altar round about by the priest. Lev.3:2. After this, the fat was burned: "It is the food of the offering
made by fire unto the Lord." Verse 11. "All
the fat is the Lord's. It shall be a perpetual statute for your generations
throughout all your dwellings, that ye eat neither fat nor blood." Verses 16, 17.
Peace offerings were of three kinds: thank
offerings, offerings for a vow, and voluntary offerings. Of these, the
thank offering or praise offering appears the most prominent. It was
offered on occasions of joy, of thankfulness for some specific instance of
deliverance, or for some signal blessing bestowed. It was offered from a
heart filled with praise of God, running over with joy.
Sin and trespass offerings asked favors of
God. They begged forgiveness. Burnt offerings stood for dedication
and consecration on the part of the offerer.
Meal offerings recognized the offerer's dependence
upon God for all temporal needs and his acceptance of the responsibility of
stewardship. Peace offerings were a praise offering for mercies received,
a thank offering for blessings enjoyed; a voluntary offering from an
overflowing heart. They asked for no favors as such; they ascribed praise
to God for what He had done, and magnified His name for His goodness and mercy
to the children of men.
The offerings in the Old Testament were embodied
prayers. They combined faith and works, prayer and faith. In their
totality they expressed man's entire relationship to, and need of, God.
Peace offerings were communion offerings. Burnt offerings were wholly
burnt on the altar; meal offerings were either burned outside the camp or eaten
by the priest, but peace offerings were divided not merely between God and the
priest, but a part, the greater part, was given to the offerer
and his family. God's part was burned on the altar. Lev.3:14-17. The priest received the
wave breast and the heave shoulder. Lev.7.33,34. The rest belonged to the offerer,
who could invite any clean person to partake with him. It must be eaten
the same day, or in some cases the second day, but not later. Lev.7:16-21.
Unleavened cakes mingled with oil, also wafers and
fried cakes, were a part of the offerings. To this was added leavened
bread. A part was presented to the Lord as a heave offering and then
given to the priest as his portion. Lev.7:11-13.
The whole ceremony constituted a kind of communion
service in which priest and people partook with the Lord at His table; a joyful
occasion, where all united in thanking God and praising Him for His mercy.
The use of leaven in the peace offering is
significant. Ordinarily leaven was not permitted in any sacrifice. In one
other instance where it was used -- that of the first fruits in the meat
offering (Lev.2:12) -- it was not permitted to
come on the altar. In the present instance it was presented to the Lord
as a heave offering and then given to the priest who had sprinkled the blood. Lev.7:13,14. In the case of the first
fruit in the meat offering, the leaven represented man bringing his offering to
God for the first time. He must bring such as he had. But he was to
do that only once. In the peace offering, both unleavened and leavened
bread are commanded. May it not be, as this is a common meal of which
God, priest, and offerer partake, that the unleavened
bread represents Him who is without sin and who is our peace; and that the
leaven represents the imperfection of man who is nevertheless accepted by God? Eph.2:13. Reference to this is
made in Amos 4:5. "The
flesh of the sacrifice of his peace offerings for thanksgiving shall be eaten
the same day." Lev.7:15. Though this was partly a
sanitary measure, that could not be the only reason; for in cases where the
peace offering was a vow or a voluntary offering it could also be eaten the
second day. Verse
16.
It was manifestly impossible for a man himself to consume his offering, if it
were a bullock or a goat or a lamb, in one day. He therefore was
permitted, and even commanded, to ask others to share in the meal. "Thou mayest not eat within thy
gates... any of the vows which thou vowest, nor thy
freewill offerings, or heave offering of thine hand; but thou must eat them
before the Lord thy God in the place which the Lord thy God shall choose, thou,
and thy son, and thy daughter, and thy manservant, and thy maidservant, and the
Levite, that is within thy gates: and thou shalt rejoice before the Lord
thy. God in all that thou puttest thine hands
unto. Take heed to thyself that thou forsake not the Levite as long as
thou livest upon the earth." Deut.12:17-19.
This was a distinguishing feature of the peace
offering. It must be eaten the same day, and it must be shared; it must
be eaten "before
the Lord," and "thou
shalt rejoice." It was a joyful, communal meal, and in this respect was different
from all other offerings.
At times peace offerings were vow offerings. For one
reason or another, perhaps because of some special blessing desired, an offerer would make a vow to the Lord. He might vow
himself to the Lord, or his wife or children, or cattle, house, or lands. Lev.27. In this way Samuel was
vowed to the Lord. 1Sam.1:11. In case of persons, a
vow could ordinarily be redeemed at a fixed valuation, adjustable by the
priests in case of the very poor. Lev.27:1-8. If the vow concerned one of the beasts
suitable for sacrifice, it could not be redeemed. If a man attempted to
exchange it for another beast, both beasts were to be offered. Verses 9,10. In case of an unclean
beast, the priest was to evaluate it. It could be redeemed by adding one
fifth to the estimated value. Verses 11-13.
Three things are mentioned as not coming under the
rule of a vow: all first-born (verses 26,27); anything devoted to God (verses 28,29); the tithe (verses 30-34). These, as belonging
already to God, could not be vowed.
There are some who do not consider vows with
favor. Yet God provided for vows. While it may be better not to vow
than to vow and not pay (Ecel. 5:5), at times vows are in order and
acceptable to God. "If thou shalt forbear to vow, it shall be no sin in thee" (Deut. 23:22); but if a man makes a vow, he
shall "not slack
to pay it." Verse 21. The making of a vow is
optional. A man may or may not make a vow, but if he makes one "he shall not break his word, he
shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth." Num.30-2.
The chief point in these statements is this, that a
man is to keep that which he has promised. He must "not break his word." He must not even be "slack" in fulfilling his vow.
When the time comes, he must pay. God expects this.
God wants His people to be honest and
dependable. He wants them to keep their promises. No man is fulfilling
his Christian duties if he is undependable in business dealings. No man
can break his word and retain God's favor. No man can "forget" to pay his bills, or even be
slack concerning them, and be counted honest in the sight of heaven. A
Christian, above all people, must be a man of his word. He must not only
be upright; he must be prompt.
This is an age in which many consider their word u
of little weight, and have little respect, for their promises. While this
may be expected of the world, there can be no excuse for any who bear the name
of Christ to repudiate their promise. Yet how many unpaid pledges there
are, how many broken vows! The marriage vow is broken; the baptismal vow
is broken; the ordination vow is broken. Covenants are repudiated,
agreements violated, pledges forgotten. Breaking of faith is common,
disregard of responsibility almost universal. Christ Himself wondered if
He should find faith on the earth when He returned. Luke 18:8. In the midst of all this
confusion there must be a people upon whom God can depend, in whose mouth there
is found no guile, who are true to their word. The question asked in Psalms 15
is also answered there. The question: "Lord, who shall abide in Thy tabernacle? who
shall dwell in Thy holy hill?" The answer: "He that walketh uprightly, and
worketh righteousness, and speaketh the truth in his heart. He that backbiteth not with his tongue, nor doeth evil to his
neighbor, nor taketh up a reproach against his neighbor. In whose eyes a
vile person is contemned; but he honoreth them that
fear the Lord. He that sweareth to his own
hurt, and changeth not. He that putteth not out
his money to usury, nor taketh reward against the innocent. He that doeth
these things shall never be moved."
One of the conditions here mentioned of abiding in
the tabernacle of God is that of "swearing to his own hurt," and not changing. A man
may agree to sell or to buy some property, and after the agreement is made,
receive a more favorable offer. Will he stick to his bargain even at a
loss to himself? He will if he is a Christian.
Regard for one's word is a crying need.
Nations need it, lest their agreements become meaningless. Business needs
it, lest confusion and disaster result. Individuals need it, lest faith
perish from the earth. Above all, Christians need it, lest men lose their
vision and hope, and despair grip mankind.
This is the supreme hour and opportunity of the
church. A demonstration is due the world, that there is
a people who remain faithful in a faithless generation; who have respect for
their own word as well as for God's; who are true to the faith once delivered
to the saints. The manifestation of the sons of God is overdue. Rom.8:19. This revelation of the
sons of God is not only "the
earnest expectation of the creature," but "the whole creation groaneth
and travaileth in pain together" for it. Verse 22. And this manifestation
will reveal a people who have the seal of God's approval. They keep the
commandments. They have the faith of Jesus. Their word is yea, yea,
and nay, nay. They are without fault, even before the throne of God. Rev.14:12,5; James 5:12.
As has been stated before, the peace offering was a
communion offering in which God, the priest, and the people partook. It
was a communal meal, held within the precincts of the temple, in which joy and
happiness prevailed, and priest and people held converse. It was not an
occasion when peace was effected, it was rather a
feast of rejoicing that peace existed. It was generally preceded by a sin
offering or a burnt offering. Atonement had been made, the blood had been
sprinkled, forgiveness had been extended, and justification assured. In
celebration of this, the offerer invited his near of
kin and his servants, as well as the Levites, to eat with him. "Thou mayest not eat within thy
gates,"
was the command, but only "in the place which the Lord thy God shall choose." Deut.12:17,18. And so the whole family
assembled within the temple gates to celebrate in a festal manner the peace
that had been established between God and man, and between man and man.
"Being justified by faith, we have peace with God
through our Lord Jesus Christ." Rom.5:1. "He
is our peace." Eph.2:14. Israel of old was
invited to celebrate the fact that they had peace with God, that their sins
were forgiven, and that they were restored to favor with God. This
celebration included son and daughter, manservant and maidservant, as well as
the Levite. All sat down at the table of the Lord and rejoiced together "in hope of the glory of
God."
In like manner we are to "joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now
received the atonement." Rom.5:2,11.
Few appreciate or rejoice in the peace of God as
they should. Though the reason may be, in many cases, a lack of appreciation of
what God has done for them, many times there are dear souls who fail to
understand that it is their right and privilege to be happy in their
religion. They live in the shadow of the cross rather than in its
sunshine. They feel that there is something wrong in happiness, that to
smile is inappropriate, and that even innocent laughter is sacrilegious.
They carry the burden of the world on their shoulders and feel that to spend
any time in recreation is not only a waste of time, but
is definitely irreligious. They are good Christians, but not happy
ones. If they were living in the days of Christ and following Him, they
would question the advisability of going to the marriage feast at Cana in
Galilee. They might even be perplexed about Christ's eating and drinking
with sinners. With John's disciples they would be fasting and praying. Luke 5:29-35.
This is written with full appreciation of the times
in which we are living. If there was ever a period when seriousness and
sobriety should characterize our work, this is such a period. In view of
the approaching crisis, what manner of men ought we to be, in all holy
conversation and godliness! All frivolity and lightness should be put
aside, and solemnity should take possession of every earthly element.
Great and momentous events are hastening apace. This is no time for
trifling and pettiness. The King is at the door!
These conditions, however, should not cause us to
lose sight of the fact that we are children of the King, that our sins are
forgiven, and that we have a right to be happy and rejoice. The work must
be finished, and we are to have a part in it; but after all, it is God who must
finish the work. Many talk and act as though they were to finish the
work, as though all depends on them. They seem to think that they have
the responsibility of the work upon them, and that though God may help, it is
really for them to do the work. Even in their prayers, they often remind
God of what He should do, fearful that He may forget some things that are on
their hearts. They are good souls, anxious to do the right thing at all
times but they have not learned to cast their burdens on the Lord. They
are doing their best to carry the load, and though groaning beneath the burden,
are determined not to give up. They struggle on and are getting much
done. They are valuable workers, and the Lord loves them dearly.
But they are lacking in some important essentials,
and are not getting much joy out of their Christianity. They are Marthas who toil and work, but leave out the one thing
needful. They look disapprovingly at the Marys
who are not doing as they themselves do, and they make their complaint to the
Lord. They do not understand how Christ can take Mary's part, when to
their mind she ought to be rebuked. They work, but they are not very happy
about it. They think that others are not doing their share. Luke 10:38-42.
It is the same lesson that is emphasized in the
story of the prodigal son. The elder son had never done anything very
wrong. He had always worked hard and had never wasted any time in
feasting and carousing. And now when the younger son came home after
spending his portion in riotous living, "he was angry and would not go in" to the feast in honor of the
returned brother. It was of no avail that the father came "out, and entreated him." He rather rebuked the
father, accusing him that "as soon as this thy son was come, which hath devoured thy living
with harlots, thou hast killed for him the fatted calf." Luke 15:30. Kindly the father replies: "It was meet that we should make
merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was
lost, and is found." Verse 32. We are not told the end of the story. Did the son
go in? Did the love of the father prevail? We do not know.
The story does not say. The last picture we have is of the elder son
being outside the house, angry. It is to be hoped that he repented and
went in, but we do not know.
Christians should be a happy people, even in the
midst of the most solemn events. And why should they not be? Their
sins are forgiven. They have peace with God. They are justified,
sanctified, saved. God has placed a new song in their mouths. They
are children of the Most High. They are walking with God. They are
happy in the love of God. Few Christians have the peace of God dwelling in their
hearts as they should have. They seem to forget their heritage.
Said Christ: "Peace
I leave with you, My peace I give unto you: not as the
world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither
let it be afraid." John 14:27.
Yet the hearts of many are troubled. They are
afraid. They are worrying. Some dear one is outside the fold, and
they are trying to "pray
him in."
Day and night they toil and pray. They leave no stone unturned in their
effort to encompass his salvation. If any one can be saved by the works
of some one else, they are determined that it shall be done. And they do
not leave God out of the reckoning. They pray to Him. They entreat
Him. They pray as though God needed prodding. And at last, the dear
one turns to God. How happy they are! Now they can rest. Now
their work is done, their task accomplished.
Does it ever occur to such souls that God is as much
interested in the dear one's conversion as they are, yes, more than they
possibly could be? Does it ever occur to them that long before they began
to pray and to work, God planned and worked for the loved one's salvation; that
He is doing and has done all that possibly can be done? That instead of
their taking over God's work and imploring Him to help them, it would be better
if they recognized the work as God's work and cooperated with Him? The
moment such realization comes to a soul, peace comes. It will not make a
person work less or pray less, but it will shift the emphasis. He will
begin to pray in faith. If we believe God is really at work, if we
believe He is interested in men's salvation, we will pray more than ever, but
we will leave the responsibility with God.
Much of our work is grounded in unbelief. With
Habakkuk we feel that God is not really doing His part. Hab.1:2-4. He needs to be
reminded. There are things that should be called to His attention, and we
proceed to bring them before Him. Instead of having faith in God, in His
wisdom, His power, we take the burden upon ourselves, saying, in effect, that
we cannot trust God to do what He has promised to do. But when faith
comes; when the wonderful light dawns on us that God is still ruling in the
affairs of men; that He is doing His best to save man- kind, and that our prayers
should be to know His will -- when this realization comes to us, then
assurance, rest, and peace are ours in abundant measure. There will be no less
works; but they will be works of faith. There will be no less prayers,
but they will be prayers of faith. Thanksgiving will ascend daily for the
privilege of working together with God. Peace will fill the heart and
soul. Anxiety and worry will be no more. Peace, sweet peace,
quietness, rest, happiness, and joy will be the daily portion. Life and
life's outlook are entirely changed. We have learned to sit at the feet
of Jesus. While Martha is still working -- and quietly complaining --
Mary is listening to the words of life. She has found the one thing
needful. She understands the word of Christ: "This is the work of God, that ye
believe."
John 6:29. And she believes and
rests.
There is no higher bliss possible than to have the
peace of God in the heart. It is the legacy which Christ left. "Peace I leave with you," He says. Wonderful
words. "My peace
I give unto you." John 14:27. His peace was that quiet
assurance that came from confidence in God. At the time Christ spoke
these words, He was nearing the cross. Golgotha was before Him. But
He did not waver. His heart was filled with peace and assurance. He
knew Him in whom He trusted. And He rested in the knowledge that God knew
the way. He might not be able to "see through the portals of the tomb." Hope might "not present
to Him His coming forth from the grave a conqueror, or tell Him of the Father's
acceptance of the sacrifice." But "by faith He rested in Him whom it had ever been His
joy to obey. ... By faith, Christ was victor." --The Desire of Ages, pp.753,756.
That same peace He bequeaths to us. It means
oneness with the Father, fellowship, communion. It means quiet joy, rest,
contentment. It means faith, love, hope. In it there is no fear,
worry, or anxiety. Whoever possesses it has that which passes
understanding. He has a source of strength not depending on circumstances.
He is in tune with God.
SIN
OFFERINGS
Chapter Nine
SIN AND SIN OFFERINGS BEAR THE
SAME name in Hebrew. The sin offering was so closely connected with the
sin that their names became identical. When Hosea says of the priests, "They eat up the sin of My
people"
that same word, "chattath," is used as occurs elsewhere for "sin offering." Hosea 4:8.
Sin offerings are first mentioned in connection with
the consecration of Aaron and his Sons. Ex.29:14. They are not, however, mentioned as something
new. It may, therefore, be taken for granted that sin offerings were
already in existence at that time.
It should be noted that sin offerings sufficed only
for sins done through ignorance. Lev.4:2,13,22,27. They concerned sins of errors, mistakes, or
rash acts, of which the sinner was unaware at the time, but which afterward
became known to him. They did not provide for sins done consciously,
knowingly, and persistently. When Israel sinned deliberately, as in
worshiping the golden calf, and defiantly refused God's mercy when Moses called
them to repentance, punishment was meted out. "There fell of the people that
day about three thousand men." Ex.32:28.
Concerning conscious or presumptuous sin, the law
reads: "But the
soul that doeth ought presumptuously, whether he be born in the land, or a
stranger, the same reproacheth the Lord; and that
soul shall be cut off from among his people. Because he hath despised the
word of the Lord, and hath broken His commandment, that soul shall utterly be
cut off; his iniquity shall be upon him." Num.15:30,31. To this law there are
some exceptions, however, which will be noted in the chapter on trespass
offerings.
The fourth chapter of Leviticus discusses the matter
of sin offerings. Four classes of offenders are mentioned: The anointed priest
(verses 3-12), the whole congregation (verses 13, 21), the ruler (verses 22-26), one of the common people (verses 27-35). The sacrifices demanded
were not the same in all cases, nor was the blood disposed of in the same
manner. If the anointed priest sinned "according to the sin of the people," or as the American Revised
Version reads, "so
as to bring guilt on the peoples," he was to bring "a young bullock without blemish unto the Lord for a
sin offering." Lev.4:3. If the whole congregation of Israel
sinned through ignorance, they also were to "offer a young bullock for the sin, and bring him
before the tabernacle of the congregation." Verse 14. If one of the rulers
sinned, he was to bring "a
kid of the goats, a male without blemish." Verse 23. If one of the common
people sinned through ignorance, he was to bring "a kid of the goats, a female
without blemish." Verse 28. In case he could not
bring a goat, he might bring a lamb, also a female. Verse 32.
In each case the sinner was to provide the offering,
lay his hand upon the head of the animal and kill it. When the whole
congregation sinned, the assembly was to provide the offering, and the elders
were to place their hands upon the head of the bullock.
In the disposition of the blood, there is a difference
that should be noted. If the anointed priest sinned and brought his
bullock and killed it, the priest should "dip his finger in the blood, and sprinkle of the
blood seven times before the Lord, before the veil of the sanctuary." Verse 6. He should also put "some of the blood upon the horns
of the altar of sweet incense before the Lord, which is in the tabernacle of
the congregation; and shall pour all the blood of the bullock at the bottom of
the altar of the burnt offering, which is at the door of the tabernacle of the
congregation." Verse 7.
This instruction is specific. As the bullock
was killed, the priest caught the blood, and some of it was taken into the
first apartment of the sanctuary. There the blood was sprinkled seven
times before the Lord, before the veil of the sanctuary and also put upon the
horns of the altar of sweet incense which stood in the first apartment.
The rest of the blood was poured out at the foot of the altar of burnt offering
in the court.
When the whole congregation sinned, the blood was
disposed of in the same manner. Some of it was taken into the first
apartment of the sanctuary and sprinkled before the veil. The horns of
the altar of incense were touched with the blood, and the rest of the blood was
poured out at the foot of the altar of burnt offering outside the court. Verse 18.
When a ruler sinned, the blood was disposed of
differently. The record reads: "The priest shall take of the blood of the sin
offering with his finger, and put it upon the horns of
the altar of burnt offering, and shall pour out his blood at the bottom of the
altar of burnt offering." Verse 25. In this case the blood was not carried into the sanctuary and
sprinkled before the veil. It was put upon the horns of the altar of
burnt offering in the court, and the rest poured out at the bottom of the same
altar.
The same was done with the blood when one of the
common people sinned. The blood was put upon the horns of the altar of burnt
offering and the rest poured out at the bottom of the altar. Verses 30,34. In each of these cases
the fat was removed from the carcass and burned upon the altar of burnt
offering. Verses
8-10,19,26,31,35. The carcass, however, was treated differently in the different
cases. If the anointed priest sinned, the "skin of the bullock, and all his
flesh, with his head, and with his legs, and his inwards, and his dung, even
the whole bullock shall he carry forth without the camp unto a clean place,
where the ashes are poured out, and burn him on the wood with fire: where the
ashes are poured out shall he be burnt." Verses 11,12. The same was to be done
with the carcass of the bullock offered for the sin offering of the whole
congregation. The carcass was carried without the camp to a clean place
and there burned on the wood with fire. Verse 21.
There is no instruction in the chapter under
consideration as to what was done with the carcass when a ruler or one of the
common people sinned. In the sixth chapter of Leviticus, however, in "the law of the sin
offering," is found some further instruction. "In the place where the burnt
offering is killed shall the sin offering be killed before the Lord: it is most
holy. The priest that offereth it for sin shall
eat it: in the holy place shall it be eaten, in the court of the tabernacle of
the congregation." Lev.6:25,26. This statement is
illuminating. The priest that offered the sin offering was to eat
it. He was to eat it in a holy place, in the court of the tabernacle of
the congregation. Verse 29 states: "All the males among the priests shall eat thereof: it
is most holy." There is an exception to this, however: "No sin offering, whereof any of
the blood is brought into the tabernacle of the congregation to reconcile
withal in the holy place, shall be eaten: it shall be burnt in the fire." Verse 30.
It will be remembered that when the anointed priest
or the whole congregation sinned, the blood was carried into the first
apartment of the sanctuary, and there sprinkled before the veil. Some of
the blood was also put upon the horns of the altar of incense in the holy
place. In these cases the blood was brought into the tabernacle of the
congregation in the holy place. These two cases, therefore, are referred
to in the statement: "No
sin offering, whereof any of the blood is brought into the tabernacle of the
congregation to reconcile withal in the holy place, shall be eaten: it shall be
burnt in the fire." When the anointed priest or the whole congregation sinned, the
blood was carried into the holy place; the flesh was not eaten, but the carcass
was taken outside the camp and burned.
When a ruler or one of the congregation sinned, the
blood was put upon the horns of the altar of burnt offering and the rest poured
out at the foot of the altar. The flesh was not burned on the altar, nor
was it taken outside the camp to be burned as in the case of the bullock.
It was given to the priests to be eaten in a holy place.
That this arrangement was not an arbitrary command
without any special meaning, is clear from an incident recorded in the tenth
chapter of Leviticus. Verses 16 to 18 read: "Moses diligently sought the goat of the sin offering
and, behold, it was burnt: and he was angry with Eleazar and Ithamar, the sons of Aaron which were left alive, saying,
Wherefore have ye not eaten the sin offering in the holy place, seeing it is
most holy, and God hath given it you to bear the iniquity of the congregation,
to make atonement for them before the Lord? Behold, the blood of it was
not brought in within the holy place: ye should indeed have eaten it in the
holy place, as I commanded."
The reader remembers that whenever a bullock was
used as a sin offering -- as in the case of the anointed priests or of the
whole congregation -- the carcass was taken outside the camp and burned.
Not so, however, in the case of the goat or the lamb. When a ruler or one
of the common people sinned, the blood of the goat or lamb was not taken into
the sanctuary, but the flesh was eaten by the priests. The verses quoted
before give the reason for this: "God hath given it [the flesh] you to bear the
iniquity of the congregation, to make atonement for them before the Lord."
According to this the priests, by eating the flesh,
took upon themselves the iniquity of the congregation; that is, they carried
the sins of the people. The reason given for eating the flesh is this: "The blood of it was not brought
in within the holy place: ye should indeed have eaten it in the holy place, as
I commanded." 'When the blood was brought into the first apartment of the
sanctuary, it was not necessary to eat the flesh. But, if the blood was
not brought into the sanctuary, the priests were to eat the flesh, and in
eating it, to bear the iniquity of the congregation. The sins were thus transferred
from the people to the priesthood.
Some have been in doubt as to whether sin was ever
transferred to the tabernacle by means of the blood, and whether it is possible
for one to bear another's sins. The case before us is conclusive.
Either the blood must be brought into the sanctuary and there sprinkled before
the veil, or else the flesh must be eaten. "God has given it you to bear the
iniquity of the congregation to make atonement for them before the Lord." In eating the flesh the
priests took upon themselves the sins which by the laying on of hands and by
confession had been transferred from the sinner to the animal. The eating
of the flesh was not necessary in cases where the blood was brought into the
sanctuary. In such cases the sins were effectively disposed of by the
carrying in of the blood into the sanctuary and in the sprinkling of it before
the veil. The carcass was takenwithout the camp
to a clean place and there burned.
The sequel of this incident as recorded in verses 19
and 20 of chapter 10 is also interesting. Aaron, Eleazar, and Ithamar had not eaten the flesh of the sin offering as they
should have done. Aaron explained their breach by saying that a calamity
had befallen him. Two of his sons, while under the influence of wine, had
been killed while officiating before the Lord, as recorded in the first part of
chapter 10. Aaron and the two sons who remained were apparently not
entirely guiltless. While they perhaps did not partake of the wine, they
were probably in perplexity about the justice of the judgment that had come
upon their brothers and fellow priests. In that condition they did not
feel that they could carry any one else's sins. They had enough in
carrying their own. It was with this in mind that Aaron asked, "If I had eaten the sin offering
today, should it have been accepted in the sight of the Lord?" "When Moses heard that, he was
content."
Verses 19,20. From this we may rightly
draw the conclusion that God did not expect the priests to eat the sin offering
and thus carry the sins of the people unless they themselves were clean. "Be ye clean, that bear the
vessels of the Lord."
As noted above, in the critical study that of late
years has been given to many parts of the Bible, doubt has been thrown upon the
question of transfer of sin. While it is clear that in each case the
sinner was to place his hands upon the sacrifice, it is denied that this
indicated either a confession or a transfer of sin. It must be admitted,
however, that something happened to the man who brought his sin offering.
In each case mentioned in the fourth chapter of Leviticus, except that of the
anointed priest, it is said that atonement was made and that the sin "shall be
forgiven him." Lev.4:20,26,31,35. The man was forgiven his
sin, and went away free.
It was not to the man only, however, that something
happened. In some way the priests came to bear the sins that the man had
borne before. The man had sinned. He had confessed his sin and been
forgiven. But now the priests bear the sin. How was that transfer
made? The inference seems clear. The man, the sinner, had placed
his hands upon the innocent animal, had confessed his sin, and thus, in a
figure, transferred his sin to the animal. Being a sinner, or at least
made to bear sin, the animal was killed. The priest, in eating the flesh,
took upon himself sinful flesh, and thus carried the "iniquity of the
congregation."
That guilt was transferred on the Day of Atonement
is clearly stated. "Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat,
and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all
their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat,
and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness." Lev.16:21. Here it is stated
definitely that Aaron is to lay his hands on the head of the goat, that he is
to confess over him the sins of the children of Israel and that he is to put
these sins on the head of the goat. May we not believe that this is exactly
the meaning in the case of the sin offering mentioned in the fourth chapter of
Leviticus? That in some way the priests came to bear the iniquity of the
congregation is clear. The statement to that effect is very
emphatic. It is also clear that it was through the eating of the flesh
that they took the sin upon themselves. This sin, of course, was not the
sin of the animal, but of the sinner who had brought his sin offering for the
purpose of forgiveness. The argument seems complete. The sinner
originally bore his sins. Now the priests bear them. They received
them by, eating the flesh of the animal. We therefore hold that the Bible
teaches the doctrine of the transfer of sin.
The laying of the hands of the sinner upon the
offering doubtless had a wider meaning, especially in the case of burnt
offerings and peace offerings. After the sinner had confessed and had
been forgiven, he was brought into fellowship with his God. A clear
understanding of this truth is essential to a comprehension of the sacrifices
involved.
Sin offerings were used in other cases besides those
mentioned in the fourth chapter of Leviticus. An instance of this is the
consecration of Aaron and his sons, as recorded in the eighth chapter of
Leviticus. It is to be noted here, however, that it is Moses who performs
the ceremony, and not the priest. Aaron and his sons, indeed, lay their
hands upon the head of the bullock for the sin offering and kill it, but it is
Moses who administers the blood and puts it upon the horns of the altar round
about. It should also be noted that in this case, instead of polluting
the altar, the blood purifies it. "Moses took the blood, and put it upon the horns of
the altar round about with his finger, and purified the altar, and poured the
blood at the bottom of the altar, and sanctified it, to make reconciliation
upon it."
Lev.8:15.
At the completion of the seven days of consecration
of Aaron, a sin offering was commanded. Aaron was to take a young calf
for a sin offering for himself before beginning his ministrations for the
people. "Aaron
therefore went unto the altar, and slew the calf of the sin offering, which was
for himself. And the sons of Aaron brought the blood unto him: and he
dipped his finger in the blood, and put it upon the horns of the altar, and
poured out the blood at the bottom of the altar." Lev.9:8,9. "And the flesh and the hide he
burnt with fire without the camp." Lev.9:11.
There were other occasions upon which sin offerings
were required. After childbirth, a young pigeon or a turtledove was to be
brought for a sin offering. Lev.12:6-8. In cases of defilement the Nazarite was to offer a turtledove or a
young pigeon for a sin offering. Num.6:10. Also, when the days of separation were
fulfilled, the Nazarite was to bring one ewe lamb of the first year without
blemish for a sin offering. Verse 14. At the consecration and cleansing of the Levites, a young bullock
was required for a sin offerings. Num.8:8,12. A sin offering was
required at the feast of the new moon (Num.28:15), at the Passover (verse 22), at Pentecost (verse 30), on the first day of the
seventh month (Num.29.5), on the tenth, fifteenth, and
twenty second day also. Verses 10-38.
The ceremony of the red heifer deserves special
consideration. It differed in many respects from the regular sin
offerings; yet it served the same purpose. Numbers 19:9 says: "It is a purification for
sin."
The word here used is the same used elsewhere for sin offering. The
American Revised Version reads: "It is a sin offering." We therefore include the
red heifer among the sin offerings commanded by God.
Israel was commanded to bring a red heifer, spotless
and without blemish, and give it to Eleazar the priest. Num.19:2,3. The priest was to bring
the heifer without the camp and have some one kill it
in his presence. The priest was then to take the blood with his finger
and sprinkle the blood toward the tabernacle of the congregation seven times. Verse 4. After this was done, one
was to burn the heifer before Eleazar, "her skin, and her flesh, and her blood, with her
dung, shall he burn." Verse 5. As the heifer was thus
being consumed, the priest was to take "cedar wood, and hyssop, and scarlet, and cast it into
the midst of the burning of the heifer." Verse 6. Then the priest was to
wash his clothes, bathe his flesh, and come back to the camp, and be unclean
until evening. Verse
7.
After this a man that was clean should gather up the ashes of the heifer and
lay them up without the camp in a clean place. It was to be "a water of separation: it is a
purification of sin." Verse 9.
The ashes thus kept were to be used in certain kinds
of uncleanness, as the touching of a dead body. In such a case, the ashes
were to be taken "and
running water shall be put thereto in a vessel; and a clean person shall take
hyssop, and dip it in the water, and sprinkle it upon the tent, and upon all
the vessels, and upon the persons that were there, and upon him that touched a
bone, or one slain, or one dead, or a grave: and the clean person shall
sprinkle upon the unclean on the third day, and on the seventh day: and on the
seventh day he shall purify himself, and wash his clothes and bathe himself in
water, and shall be clean at even." Num.19:17-19.
It will be noted that while this ceremony was "a purification for sin," no blood as such was used in
the cleansing of the man from his defilement. The only time the use of
blood is mentioned is at the time of the killing of the heifer when the priests
took the blood and sprinkled it seven times before the tabernacle of the
congregation. Verse 4. In the application to the individual person,
however, there was no sprinkling of blood.
It should also be noted that the heifer was not
killed within the confines of the court of the tabernacle where the other
sacrifices were killed. The blood was not carried into the tabernacle,
the blood was not sprinkled before the veil, it was not put on the horns of the
altar of incense, it was not put on the horns of the altar of burnt offering,
nor was it poured out at the altar of burnt offering; it did 'not come in
direct contact with either the holy place or the altar of burnt offering.
In the ritual of cleansing it was required that a
clean person officiate. Still another point is that this cleansing
availed not only for the children of Israel, but also for the stranger. "It shall be unto the children of
Israel and unto the stranger that sojourneth among
them, for a statute forever." Verse 10.
It may be well to note the statement recorded in
Numbers 19:13, that the tabernacle was defiled if a man did not purify
himself. "Whosoever
toucheth the dead body of any man that is dead, and purifieth
not himself, defileth the tabernacle of the
Lord."
"But the man
that shall be unclean, and shall not purify himself, that soul shall be cut off
from among the congregation, because he hath defiled the sanctuary of the Lord:
the water of separation hath not been sprinkled upon him; he is unclean." Num.19:13,20. That the sanctuary was
defiled by confession of sin and sprinkling of blood is admitted by all.
Here the statement is made that a man who does not purify himself, who does not
confess his sin, defiles the sanctuary of the Lord. The doctrinal import
of this statement should not be overlooked.
The occasional ceremony of the red heifer has deep
significance for the reverent student of God's word. Purification from
sin is here accomplished by the use of water in which ashes from the slain
heifer have been put. This cleansing is for the stranger as well as for
the children of Israel. Its ministration is without the camp apart from
the ordinary worship of Jehovah, and is not directly connected with the usual
round of the sanctuary service.
It is to this ceremony that the writer of Hebrews
refers, when he says: "If
the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling the
unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: how much more shall the
blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to
God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?" Heb.9:13,14. David's prayer is: "Purge me with hyssop, and I
shall be clean: wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow." Ps.51:7.
A somewhat similar use of water for purposes of
purification is mentioned in the fifth chapter of the book of Numbers. In
case of certain sins, "the
priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel; and of the dust that is in
the floor of the tabernacle the priest shall take, and
put it into the water." Verse 17. The "holy water" thus prepared is called "bitter water" in verses 18, 19, 23.
While it is not necessary to go into detail concerning the distressing ceremony
mentioned in this chapter, we call attention to the twenty-third verse.
The priest was to write these curses in a book, and then "blot them out with the bitter
water."
While blood is mentioned in the Old Testament as the
purification for sin, water is mentioned in the same way. The laver
situated just before the tabernacle; the water used in the ceremony of the red
heifer; the bitter water used for blotting out sin as recorded in the fifth
chapter of Numbers, testify to the use of water for ceremonial cleansing. Of
Christ it is written, "This
is He that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but
by water and blood." 1John
5:6. At the crucifixion "one of the soldiers with a spear
pierced His side, and forthwith there came out blood and water, and he that saw
it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true that
ye might believe." John
19:34,35.
The baptismal water, the precious ordinance of humility, does still "save us (not the putting away of
the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God)." 1Peter 3:21.
SIN-TRESPASS
OFFERINGS
Chapter Ten
SIN OFFERINGS WERE FOR SINS DONE
IGNORANTLY or in error, and did not cover sins done willfully or
knowingly. When an Israelite had unwittingly done "somewhat against any of the
commandments of the Lord," he was not held responsible until it "come to his knowledge." As soon as he was made
aware that he had done wrong, he was to bring an offering "for his sin which he hath
sinned."
Lev.4:27,28. But, as stated, sin
offerings did not in any way avail for transgression done knowingly. Sins
of this nature were called trespasses, and demanded a different kind of
treatment.
Ordinarily, a trespass is a willful sin, knowingly
committed, a deliberate "stepping
over."
It might at times be unwittingly committed, but in such cases it was held that
the man not only might have known better, but that he should have known better,
and that he therefore was responsible for his ignorance. The Hebrew word
for trespass offering, asham, might well be
translated guilt or debt offering. It denotes a greater degree of guilt
than the sin offering, though the sin itself may be no greater.
There are some sins which partake of the nature of a
trespass. They are partly sin and partly trespass. A person may to
some degree be ignorant of the wrong he has done, and yet not be entirely
ignorant of it. It is doubtless for this reason that some transgressions
mentioned in the first part of the fifth chapter of Leviticus are spoken of as
both sins and trespasses. To these belong the with-holding of information
(verse 1), the touching of any unclean
thing (verse 2), the touching of the
uncleanness of man (verse
3), and
swearing rashly (verse
4).
In these cases the sinner was commanded to bring a "trespass offering unto the Lord for
his sin which he had sinned, a female from the flock, a lamb or a kid of the
goats for a sin offering." Verse 6. It will be noted that the offering is called both a trespass and a
sin offering. In verse 7 it is called a trespass offering. In verse
9 it is called a sin offering. Some Bible commentators treat these offerings as
sin offerings; others count them as trespass offerings. In view of the
fact that they are called both sin and trespass offerings, we may consider them
as a kind of intermediate offering between the two, and call them sin-trespass
offerings.
A person who sinned in any of the above-mentioned
things was to bring a female from the flock, a lamb, or a kid of the goats for
a sin offering. Verse
6. If
he was unable to bring a lamb, he might bring a turtledove or a young
pigeon. The blood was sprinkled upon the altar of burnt offering and the
rest of the blood poured out at the foot of the altar, the same ritual as in
the Bin offerings mentioned in the preceding chapter. Verses 7-9.
If the sinner was unable to bring a turtledove or a
young pigeon, he might bring for his offering the tenth part of an ephah of
fine flour for a sin offering. He was not, however, permitted to put oil
or frankincense thereon. The reason for this is given: "It is a sin offering." The priest, in offering
this, took a handful of flour and burnt it for a memorial upon the altar.
The remnant belonged to the priest the same as in the meat offering. Verses 11-13.
We are here face to face with a rather remarkable
development. Ordinarily a sin offering should be a blood offering, that
is, the life of some animal must be taken and the blood sprinkled. Here,
however, the offering of a tenth part of an ephah of flour is accepted.
It is definitely stated that the priest should take a handful of this flour and
burn it on the altar, "and
the priest shall make atonement for him as touching his sin that he hath sinned
in one of these, and it shall be forgiven him." Verse 13. Lest any should think
that this is an ordinary meat offering, it is twice stated, "it is a sin offering." Verses 11,12. It seems clear,
therefore, that in this case at least, a sin offering was accepted that did not
contain blood, yet made atonement for sin.
This calls attention to the statement found in the
twenty-second verse of the ninth chapter of Hebrews, "Almost all things are by the law
purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission." While it is true in
general that in the typical service there could be no remission of sins without
the shedding of blood, we are not to forget the exemption here noted. The
American Revised Version says, "According to the law, I may almost say, all things
are cleansed with blood, and apart from shedding of blood there is no
remission." The adverb "almost" probably qualifies both the
clauses, so that according to the American Revised Version the statement might
be read: "I may
almost say all things are cleansed with blood," and "I may almost say apart from
shedding of blood there is no remission." That is, the rule that
there is no remission without shedding of blood, holds good, though in the
types there is the exception here mentioned.
A similar situation confronts us with reference to
the red heifer discussed in the preceding chapter. There was no immediate
application of blood in the cleansing process there mentioned, but only of
water and ashes. Yet it was a purification for sin, a sin offering. Num.19:9.
It is not our contention that sins are ever forgiven
without the sacrifice on Calvary. The death of Christ is necessary for our
salvation. It is, however, significant that in the above-mentioned types
atonement and forgiveness of sin were sometimes accomplished without immediate
and direct use of blood.
In searching for an application of this in the
Christian economy, may we not believe that it signifies and applies to such
persons as have no direct or definite knowledge of the Saviour and yet are
living up to all the light they have, doing God's will as far as they
understand it? May it not signify such heathen as have never heard of the
name of Jesus and yet to a greater or lesser extent partake of His spirit? We
believe that there are those who have never heard the blessed name of the
Master, who know nothing of Calvary or of the redemption wrought for them on
the cross, who have exhibited the Christ spirit and will be saved in the
kingdom of heaven. To such, we believe, it applies.
The first case mentioned in the fifth chapter of
Leviticus, verse one, is that of withholding information when under oath.
"If a soul sin,
and hear the voice of swearing, and is a witness, whether he hath seen or known
of it; if he do not utter it, then he shall bear his
iniquity." The "voice
of swearing" is called the "voice
of adjurations" in the American Revised Version, and has reference to the oath
administered in a Jewish court. When Christ was on trial, "The high priest answered and
said unto Him, I adjure Thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether Thou
be the Christ, the Son of God." Matt.26:63. Under these circumstances Christ could not keep silence, but
answered: "Thou
hast said." He felt compelled to answer when the adjuration was invoked,
though He previously had "held His peace." Verses 63,64.
It is such a case as is here under consideration.
The man is under oath or adjuration; he "is a witness," and has been asked "whether he hath seen or
known"
of the transgression. He refuses to answer; he does "not utter it." In that case "he shall bear his
iniquity." Verses two and three refer to touching anything unclean, of "whatsoever uncleanness it
be."
The man may have done it unwittingly; it may have been "hidden from him," but "when he knoweth of it, then he
shall be guilty."
The fourth case is that of a man who swears "rashly with his lips to do evil
or to do good, whatsoever it be that a man shall utter rashly with an
oath." A.R.V. When he knows of it, he
also "shall be
guilty."
Verse 4.
In each of these cases, the appropriate offering was
to be brought by the sinner for his transgression, "and it shall be forgiven
him."
It is sometimes urged that God in olden times did not require confession and
restitution in order to grant forgiveness, but only asked the sinner to bring
the required sacrifice. The ritual of the trespass offering should
correct that impression. Confession was definitely required. "When a man or woman shall commit
any sin that men commit, to do a trespass against the Lord, and that person be
guilty; then they shall confess their sin which they have done." Num.5:6;7.
A general confession, however, was not
sufficient. "It
shall be, when he shall be guilty in one of these things, that he shall confess
that he hath sinned in that thing." Lev.5:5. This statement is definite and decisive. He is not only to
confess, but he is to confess that he has sinned in "that thing." It is "that thing" that counts. Only as he
thus confesses can he receive the atonement.
In cases where fraud was involved, confession was
not enough, even though the confession was specific. There must also be
restitution. This restitution consisted of one fifth of the sum involved
besides the principal. "He shall recompense his trespass with the principal thereof, and
add unto it the fifth part thereof, and give it unto him against whom he hath
trespassed." Num.5:7. In case it was not possible to
restore the sum to the man against whom the trespass had been made, either
because of death or otherwise, and there were no near relatives, the recompense
was to be made to the priest. Verse 8. This restitution was in addition to the ram of the trespass
offering.
From this consideration it is clear that God
demanded more of His people than the bringing of an offering. He demanded
confession and restitution. If it still be urged that nothing is said of
repentance, the obvious answer is that God here deals with the outward acts of
worship only. Had repentance been demanded as a requisite for
forgiveness, it would have been possible for a priest to deny a sinner
atonement even though the man had otherwise complied with God's
ordinance. It would have left with the priest the decision regarding
whether the man had really repented or not. This is too dangerous a power
to give any man. So God wisely reserved that to Himself. If any
doubt remains as to what God demands by way of repentance, and how the people
understood God's demand, read the prayer of Solomon at the dedication of the
temple, especially 1Kings 8:46-53. Or listen to David's supplication: "Thou desirest
not sacrifice; else would I give it; Thou delightest
not in burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a
broken and a contrite heart, O God, Thou wilt not
despise."
Ps.51:16,17. Israel had abundant
occasion to know that what God wanted was not sacrifice, but a broken and
contrite heart. Had they wanted to, they could have made their worship
both beautiful and spiritual, as doubtless some did.
There were other occasions that demanded both a
trespass and a sin offering, and hence belong to the category now
considered. One of these was the cleansing of lepers. After being
examined by the priest and proclaimed clean, the leper was restored to society
and citizenship by a special cleansing ceremony described in Leviticus
14:1-8. Another ceremony was necessary, however, to restore him to church
fellowship and permit him to take part in the sanctuary service. This is
recorded in verses 9-32. The leper was to provide a trespass offering as
well as a sin offering, in addition to the regular burnt and meal
offering. The trespass offering, the lamb, was killed, and the blood
sprinkled, not on the altar, but put upon "the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon
the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot: and the
priest shall take some of the log of oil and pour it into the palm of his own
left hand." Verses 14,15. After that the priest
was to take oil and "sprinkle
of the oil with his finger seven times before the Lord." Verse 16. He was then to anoint
the leper, doing with the oil as he had with the blood. The priest was to
put it "upon the
tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his
right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot, upon the blood of the
trespass offering: and the remnant of the oil that is in the priest's hand he
shall pour upon the head of him that is to be cleansed: and the priest shall
make an atonement for him before the Lord." Verses 17,18. After this the priest
was to offer the sin and the burnt offering. If the leper was poor, he
might substitute for the two lambs, two turtledoves or young pigeons, "such as he is able to get." Verses 21,22. This statement occurs
several times in the narrative. God asked only that which the man was
able to provide.
It is significant that leprosy demanded a trespass
as well as a sin offering. Are we to draw the conclusion from this that
leprosy is the result of known transgression? We do not think so.
It is better to believe that the ritual in the case of leprosy is merely
illustrative of the fact, that there are sicknesses which result from willful
transgressions and which cannot be charged to mere ignorance. Such is
undoubtedly the case, though it would be hazardous for man to pronounce finally
in any specific case.
Another occasion that called for a trespass offering
was the defiling of a Nazarite during the period of his separation. If
this occurred, he was to "bring a lamb of the first year for a trespass offering: but the
days that were before shall be lost, because his separation was defiled." Num.6:12. Note the statement that
even though atonement was made for him, yet "the days that were before shall be lost." Forgiveness may be had,
yet in many cases there is a definite loss. This agrees with the New Testament
statement: "If
any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be
saved; yet so as by fire." 1Cor.3:15. The man is saved, but he suffers loss.
The ritual of the trespass or guilt offerings is the
same as for the sin offerings. The animals were killed in the same place
and the fat burned on the altar of burnt offering in the same way. Lev.7:1-5. The priests were
commanded to eat the sin offerings as provided in Leviticus 6:24-30, and the
same held good for the trespass offerings. "Every, male among the priests
shall eat thereof: it shall be eaten in a holy place: it is most holy. As
the sin offering is, so is the trespass offering: there is one law for them:
the priest that maketh atonement therewith shall have it." Lev.7:6,7.
One distinction between the sin and the trespass
offering is that of the sprinkling of the blood. In the sin offering, the
blood was put upon the horns of the altar of burnt offering. Lev.4:25,30,34. This is not mentioned
concerning the trespass offering. According to Leviticus 7:2, the blood
of the trespass offering was sprinkled round about upon the altar, the same as
the blood of the burnt and peace offerings. It is thought by some that
the statement: "As
the sin offering is, so is the trespass offering: there is one law for
them" (Lev.7:7), has reference to the
sprinkling of the blood. In that case, the blood of the sin offering as
well as that of the trespass offering would he sprinkled round about upon the
altar and also put on the horns of the altar. However, it appears that
the "one
law" has
special reference to the eating of the flesh. In the absence of any clear
statement concerning this, we conclude that the blood of the sin offering was
put upon the horns of the altar, that of the trespass offering sprinkled round
about upon the altar, and that in both cases the remainder was poured out at
the base of the altar of burnt offering.
THE DAILY SERVICE
Chapter Eleven
THE PRIESTS WHO OFFICIATED IN THE sanctuary were divided into twenty-four
courses, or divisions, each of which served twice a year, one week at a
time. The Levites were similarly divided, as were also the people.
The lambs for the evening and morning sacrifices were provided by the people;
and the section of the people who provided the lambs for any particular
week would send their representatives to Jerusalem for that week to
assist in the services, while the rest of the people remained at home
conducting a special week of devotion and meditation. On occasion of a
great feast, such as the Passover or the Day of Atonement, large numbers of
priests would be called to the sanctuary at one time, and also a corresponding
number of Levites.
The daily service
included the offering of a lamb upon the altar of burnSt
offering each evening and morning, with the appropriate meal and drink
offerings, the trimming and lighting of the lamps in the holy place, the
offering of incense, with the accompanying work, the offering of the meal
offering of Aaron and his sons, and the offering of individual sacrifices, such
as sin, burnt, meal, and peace offerings. Besides these daily duties,
there were many others, such as purification sacrifices, offerings for lepers,
for Nazarite vows, for defilements. Men were also needed to take care of
the ashes, to provide and examine the wood used on the altar, to serve as
watchmen, to open and close gates, and to act as general caretakers. The
temple enclosure was a busy place from the first streak of dawn until the gates
were closed in the evening.
While it was yet
dark in the morning, the gates were opened and the people were permitted to
come in. Lots were cast among the priests to determine who was to present
the sacrifice, who was to sprinkle the blood, who was to remove the ashes, who
was to offer the incense, who was to trim the lamps, and who was to provide the
wine for the drink offerings. The priests had spent the night within the
temple precincts, though only the older priests were permitted to lie down to
rest. The others were expected to keep awake and be ready whenever
called. In the morning before daylight, they bathed, and when the time
came for the casting of lots, they were all ready.
In determining who
was to offer incense, it was not expected that any priest who had officiated
before should take part. When the sanctuary was first erected, Aaron and
his sons officiated daily. In later times there were so many priests that
lots had to be cast to decide who was to offer incense. It was therefore
unusual for any priest to officiate in the burning of incense more than once in
his career. As this particular part of the daily service brought the
priest nearer the divine Presence than any other, it was considered a great
honor as well as a responsibility, and a much-coveted prize.
As the priest entered
the sanctuary to offer the incense, the lamb for the morning sacrifice, which
had previously been selected and presented to the Lord, stood tied to one of
the rings in the floor on the north side of the altar. The wind-pipe and
gullet of the lamb were slashed with a knife, and the blood was caught in a
golden bowl and sprinkled round about upon the altar. What remained of
the blood was poured out at the foot of the altar. After this the animal
was flayed and cut into several pieces. The inwards were placed upon one
of the marble tables supplied for that purpose, and washed. After this, six
priests carried these pieces to the top of the altar, where they were placed in
order and burned. Another priest carried the meal offering of flour;
still another, the baked meal offering of the high priest; and yet another, the
drink offering. The offerings were all salted with salt before being
placed upon the altar.
While this was going
on outside, the priest whose work it was to offer the incense entered the holy
place. He was ordinarily assisted by another priest who brought live
coals from the altar of burnt offering in a golden vessel and placed them upon
the altar of incense and withdrew. The priest whose duty it was to offer
the incense would then raise the lid of the censer containing the incense and
pour it upon the coals on the altar. As the incense ascended in a cloud
of smoke he would kneel before the altar in silent adoration.
It must have been a
solemn experience for a priest to be alone in the holy place, near the awful
presence of Jehovah, the Lord of hosts. As, in most cases, it was the
first time he had ever so officiated, it was not a common experience. No
priest ever forgot the moments he was alone with God. And if, as at times
it happened, the Lord revealed Himself in the cloud above the mercy seat, the
impression of God's holiness left upon the mind of the priest, was so profound
that it never could be erased. He had seen the glory of the Lord and was
not consumed.
The offering of
incense was concluded about the same time that the priests finished their
morning work at the altar of burnt offering. As the last act -- the
pouring out of the drink offering -- was being finished, the Levites began
singing the appointed psalm, which was interspersed with blasts from the silver
trumpets blown by the priests. Whenever the trumpets sounded, the people
fell down and prayed. The high priest proceeded to the steps of the
temple and with out-stretched hands pronounced the priestly benediction upon
the people. This concluded the morning service. The evening
service, which took place about three o'clock in the afternoon, was similar to
the morning service. The lamb was slain, the blood sprinkled, incense
offered, and the priestly benediction again pronounced. At dark the gates
were closed.
Thus the daily
service was carried on every day in the year, including Sabbath and feast
days. On the Sabbath two lambs were offered in the morning and two in the
evening, instead of one as on week days. On certain feast days the number
was increased to seven, but otherwise the service remained the same.
The lamb offered in
the daily service was a burnt offering. It was representative of the whole
nation, a kind of summary of all offerings. It contained in itself the vital characteristics of each of the
sacrifices: it was a blood offering, signifying atonement; it was a
substitutionary offering-"it shall be accepted for him" (Lev.1:4); it was a dedicatory offering, wholly given
to God and consumed on the altar; it was a sweet-savor offering, "an
offering made by fire, of a sweet savor unto the Lord." Verse 13.
Though the morning
and evening sacrifice was for the nation as a whole and did not avail for any
specific person, it nevertheless served a definite purpose for the
individual. When an Israelite had sinned, he was to bring an offering to
the temple and there confess his sin. It was not always possible,
however, to do this. An offender might live a day's journey, or even a
week's, distant from Jerusalem. It was impossible for him to come to the
temple every time he sinned. For such cases the morning and evening
sacrifice constituted a temporary atonement. It provided a "covering"
until such time as the sinner could personally appear at the tabernacle and
offer his individual offering.
This is illustrated
in the case of Job. His sons "went and feasted in their houses,
every one his day." Job 1:4. At such
feasts, happenings doubtless occurred which were not pleasing to God. Job
himself feared that his sons might sin, and also that they might forget, or
delay to bring, the necessary sacrifice. For this reason
Job "rose up early in the morning, and offered burnt offerings
according to the number of them all: for Job said, It may be that my sons have
sinned, and cursed God in their hearts. Thus did
Job continually." Verse 5.
Job offered a burnt
offering for each of his sons. "It may be that my sons have
sinned," he said. He believed that this offering would provide a
temporary atonement for them until such time as they recognized their fault and
were ready to come to God themselves.
In like manner, the
daily morning and evening sacrifice provided temporary atonement for
Israel. It signified both consecration and acceptance by
substitution. Of the individual burnt offering it is said: "It
shall be accepted for him." Lev.1:4. If the individual offering was thus "accepted for
him," may we not believe that the national offering was accepted for
the nation?
Christ died for
all. Saint and sinner alike share in the sacrifice of Calvary. It
was "while we were yet sinners" that He gave His life a
ransom. Many will not make personal application of the sacrifice, but the
fact remains that Christ died for them. His blood covers them. Full
and ample provision has been made for their salvation. Christ "is
the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe." 1Tim.4:10. Every soul living today owes his life
to Golgotha. Had it not been for "the Lamb slain from the
foundation of the world," Adam would have been without hope. The
words, "In the day that thou eatest thereof
thou shalt surely die," would have sealed his fate for eternity. Rev.13:8;
Gen.2:17. But Adam was
spared. He did not die. The Lamb took his place.
So it is now.
God has not changed. Sin and sinners have no right to exist. Sin is
as offensive in God's sight now as in the Garden of Eden. Sinners are
permitted to live and are granted a stay of execution only by virtue of the
atoning blood of Christ. Because the Lamb died, they live.
Probation is granted them. From day to day Christ gives them life, "if
haply they might feel after Him, and find Him." Acts 17:27.
As the morning and
evening sacrifices were for the nation, and covered provisionally all sin
committed during the preceding night or the day, it is readily understood that
some of the sins thus covered were not confessed, and perhaps never would
be. Unless it is believed that every man in Israel was immediately made
aware that he had transgressed, and confessed his sins, some time must
intervene between the commission of the sin and its confession. This
would, of course, be still more accentuated if some weeks or months elapsed
before confession. In case of the impenitent or those who apostatized, their
day of grace expired on the Day of Atonement. Whoever at that time did
not afflict his soul was "cut off from among his people," that
is, he was put outside the pale of the church, excommunicated. Lev.23:29.
The question of
whether all sins committed were transferred to the sanctuary, is sometimes
raised. Our study thus far has led us to believe that sins were
temporarily provided for in the morning and evening sacrifice, when the lamb
was offered on the altar of burnt offering for the nation. The blood of
the sacrifice used in burnt offerings was always sprinkled "round about
upon the altar." Lev.1:5,11. In case a fowl was used, the blood
was "wrung out at the side of the altar." Verse 15. We therefore accept the view that in
the daily service through the blood sprinkled on the altar there was a transfer
of sins made to the altar of burnt offering, and that the sins thus transferred
included the sins of all the people. If it be admitted that the burnt
offering provided atonement for sin, as stated in Leviticus 1:4; if it be
admitted that the daily burnt offering was for the nation, and that it did the
same work for Israel that Job's burnt offerings did for his sons (Job
1:5); if it be considered highly
improbable that all sins were immediately known and confessed before the time
of the next morning or evening sacrifice, the conclusion seems unavoidable that
all sins were temporarily provided for when the lamb was offered in sacrifice
on the altar.
It hardly needs to
be repeated that this temporary provision became efficacious to salvation only
as the offender made personal confession of sin and brought his individual
sacrifice for sin, just as a sinner is now saved by Christ's sacrifice on
Calvary only if he personally accepts Christ. The death of the Lamb of
God on Golgotha was for all men, but only those who accept the sacrifice and
make personal application of it will be saved. The death of the lamb on
the Jewish altar was for the whole nation, but only those who repented and
showed their faith by bringing a personal sacrifice were included in the
reconciliation on the Day of Atonement. The others were "cut
off."
It should be noted,
however, that these unconfessed sins were not transferred to the sanctuary
proper, but to the altar of burnt offering. The priests did not eat the
flesh of the burnt offering -- it was all burnt on the altar; so the priests
did not bear these sins. Lev.1:13. The
blood was not placed on the horns of the altar, as in the case of sin
offerings, nor was it carried into the sanctuary, but was sprinkled "round
about" upon the altar of burnt offering. Lev.1:5,11;
4:25,30,34. It is therefore clear
that these sins were transferred to the altar of burnt offering and not the sanctuary
proper.
The morning and
evening sacrifices were symbolic, not only of the atonement provided through
the lamb, but also of the nation's consecration to Jehovah. The victim,
wholly burned on the altar, was emblematic of those who daily dedicated themselves
to God, whose all was on the altar, and who were willing to follow the Lamb
wheresoever it might lead them. Morning and evening their prayers
ascended to the God of Israel, mingled with the sweet incense of Christ's
righteousness and perfection.
The shewbread was a
perpetual offering to the Lord, and might therefore be considered a part of the
daily service. It consisted of twelve cakes placed in two rows upon the
table in the first apartment of the sanctuary. This bread was renewed every
Sabbath at the time when the courses of the priests were changed. The
bread which was always before the Lord, was called the "presence
bread." Ex.25:30, A.R.V.
As the morning and evening sacrifice symbolized the daily consecration of the
nation to God and also its dependence upon the atoning blood, as the offering
of incense symbolized the merits and intercession of Christ, as the lamps in
the candlesticks represented the light of God shining in the soul and
enlightening the world, so the shewbread represented man's acknowledgment of
his dependence upon God for both temporal and spiritual food, to be received
only through the merits and intercession of Christ who is the bread which came
down from heaven. John 6:48-51.
The daily service
thus provided atonement through the blood of the lamb; intercession through the
ascending cloud of incense; life, physical and spiritual, through the bread of
the presence; and light through the lamp on the candlestick. Viewed from
man's side, the daily service signified consecration, illustrated by the lamb
on the altar; prayer, through the smoke of the incense; acknowledgment of
complete dependence upon God for daily food; and realization that only through
the light which God sheds upon our pathway can our darkened minds and lives be
illuminated. The daily service symbolized and signified man's need of
God, and also God's complete provision for supplying that need.
The services so far
described have been of a general nature, for the nation. There was another kind
of equal importance, namely, the offering of sacrifices brought by individuals
for specific purposes. These were divided into two classes; sweet-savor
offerings and nonsweet-savor offerings. The
sweet-savor offerings were such as denoted consecration, dedication, or thankfulness.
They were burnt offerings, peace offerings, and meal offerings. The nonsweet offerings were sin and trespass offerings.
With the exception of the meal offerings these were all blood offerings, and as
such had atoning value, though they were not specifically offered for
sin. The burnt sacrifice was an offering of consecration and dedication,
yet it had atoning significance. Lev.1:4. So
also had the peace offering. The offerer placed
his hand upon the head of the victim and killed it at the door of the
tabernacle; after that the priest sprinkled the blood upon the altar round
about. This procedure was the same as in the burnt offering, and
signified atonement. Lev.3:2.
The sin and trespass
offerings were the most important. They atoned for individual sins and
restored the offender to favor with God. As these offerings have been
discussed elsewhere, it is not necessary to go into detail with regard to the
ritual. Some observations, however, may be in order.
The blood of the
sacrificial victim was not always carried into the holy place, there to be
sprinkled before the veil. This, as has been noted before, was done only
in the case of the anointed priest and of the whole congregation. Lev.4:5,6,16,17. When an ordinary person or a ruler
sinned, the blood was sprinkled on the altar of burnt offering outside the
tabernacle, and the flesh was eaten by the priests. Lev.4:25,34; 6:30.
When the anointed
priest sinned, there was none higher in rank to bear his sin. In such a
case the flesh was not eaten, but the blood was carried into the holy place and
there sprinkled before the veil. The same was done in case the whole
nation sinned as a nation. The flesh was not eaten, but the blood was
carried into the holy place, and there sprinkled before the veil.
When one of the
common people sinned or one of the rulers, the situation was different.
For them the priesthood could bear sin. The flesh was therefore eaten,
and the priest who ate it, by that act took upon himself the sin of the
individual. Besides the priest's eating the flesh, the blood was put upon
the horns of the altar of burnt offering. From this it will be seen that
individual sins which were confessed were transferred to the sanctuary in two
ways. When the anointed priest or the whole congregation sinned, the sin
by means of the blood, was transferred to the sanctuary, to the holy
place. When a ruler or one of the common people sinned, the sin, by means
of the eating of the flesh, was transferred to the priesthood, and by means of
the blood, to the altar of burnt offering.
When the sanctuary
service was first instituted, Aaron, as well as his sons, ministered daily in
the first apartment of the sanctuary. The high priest offered the meal
offering, cared for the lamps, lighted them, and burned incense in the holy
place. Lev.6:19-23; 24:2-4; Num.8:2,3; Ex.30:7,8. At a later time, it became customary
for the priests to officiate in the first apartment, and only occasionally did
the high priest serve there, as on Sabbath or feast days, and especially on the
Day of Atonement and the week preceding. It is significant that although
in the daily service the high priest officiated clad in his official
high-priestly garment, he wore the priestly white garments when he entered the
most holy on the Day of Atonement. Lev.16:4,23,24. In summing up the work of the daily
service in the sanctuary, the following points stand out prominently:
1. A general,
provisional atonement for the nation is provided in the morning and evening
sacrifice of the lamb upon the altar of burnt offering. The blood of the
lamb both registers the sins committed and provides the atonement for them
until such time as the offender brings his individual sacrifice for sin, or, if
he fails to do that, until the Day of Atonement. The body of the lamb
signifies Israel's consecration to Jehovah, and is typical of Christ who "hath
loved us, and hath given Himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for
a sweet-smelling savor." Eph.5:2. The sins provided for temporarily and provisionally in the morning
and evening sacrifices are, generally speaking, unconfessed sins. These,
as well as other sins, defile the tabernacle of the Lord. Num.19:13,20.
2. The
individual sacrifices for sin constitute a record of sins forgiven. Each
sin has already been recorded by the sprinkling of the blood of the morning and
evening burnt offering. The bringing of an individual offering records
forgiveness for these same sins. It is as though books were kept and a
faithful record made of all sin. Then, as the offender repents of his sin
and asks forgiveness, pardon is recorded against his name.
3. The
unconfessed sins are recorded on the altar of burnt offering outside the
tabernacle. The confessed sins are recorded in the holy place, or else on
the horns of the altar of burnt offering. However, all confessed sins
eventually find their way into the sanctuary. As the priests partake of the
flesh of the offerings, the blood of which is sprinkled on the horns of the
altar of burnt offering, the sins are, through the priests' offerings as well
as by the daily offering of the high priest (Heb.7:27), transferred to the holy place. We are therefore warranted in
saying that all confessed -- and only confessed sins -- are in the sanctuary
proper. When the Day of Atonement comes, only confessed sins come in
review and only such sinners as have by repentance and confession already
received forgiveness and have had their sins transferred to the sanctuary,
receive the atonement, the blotting out of sins.
Thus day by day, throughout the year, sins
were transferred to the sanctuary, defiling it. This, of course, could
not continue indefinitely. A day of final reckoning must come, a day of
cleansing. Such a day was the Day of Atonement. It was the day of
judgment, the high day of the year. To this we shall now give our
attention.
Chapter Twelve
THE DAY OF ATONEMENT WAS THE GREAT day in Israel. It was peculiarly
holy, and on it no work must be done. The Jews called it Yoma, the day. It was the keystone of the sacrificial
system. Whoever did not on that day afflict his soul, was cut off from
Israel. Lev.23:29. The Day
of Atonement, occurred on the tenth day of the seventh mouth, called Tishri,
about the latter part of our October. The special preparation for this day
began ten days earlier. Of this the Jewish Encyclopedia, article "Atonement,"
says: "The first ten days of Tishri grew to be the ten penitential days
of the year intended to bring about a perfect change of heart, and to make
Israel like newborn creatures, the culmination being reached on the Day of
Atonement when religion's greatest gift, God's condoning mercy, was to be
offered to man." --Vol.11, p.281. "The statement is further made that the idea developed
also in Jewish circles that on the first of Tishri, the sacred New Year's Day
and the anniversary of creation, man's doings were judged and his destiny was
decided, and that on the tenth day of Tishri the decree of heaven was
sealed."--Ibid.
A Jewish conception
of what took place on the Day of Atonement is given in the Jewish Encyclopedia
as follows: "God, seated on His throne to judge the world, at the same
time Judge, Pleader, Expert, and Witness, openeth the Book of Records; it is
read, every man's signature being found therein. The great trumpet is
sounded; a still, small voice is heard; the angels shudder, saying, This is the day of judgment: for His very ministers are not
pure before God. As a shepherd mustereth his
flock, causing them to pass under his rod, so doth God cause every living soul
to pass before Him to fix the limit of every creature's life and to foreordain
its destiny. On New Year's Day the decree is written; on the Day of
Atonement it is sealed who shall live and who are to die, etc. But penitence,
prayer, and charity may avert the evil decree."--Id., p.286.
On the third day of
the seventh month the high priest moved from his house in Jerusalem into the
temple precincts. There he spent the week in prayer and meditation, and
also in rehearsing the ritual for the Day of Atonement, so that he would make
no mistake. There was with him also, at least in later years, another
priest, who, in case the high priest should become sick or die, could go on
with the service on the Day of Atonement. Generally, one of the older
priests was also with the high priest during this time, instructing and helping
him, and making sure that all was understood and would be done in the approved
manner. The night before the Day of Atonement, the high priest was not permitted
to sleep, lest some defilement should come to him.
On the Day of
Atonement all were up early. The high priest officiated in the daily
morning sacrifice, which was conducted on this day as on other days. Num. 29:11. After this service was over, the special
services began. The record in the sixteenth chapter of Leviticus yields
the following information:
The high priest was
first to bathe and put on the holy white garments. Throughout the year he
had been wearing the high-priestly insignia, the beautiful robe and ephod with
the precious stones and breastplate. On this day, however, before going
into the most holy, he put off these garments and put on the white garments of
the priest, the difference between his attire and that of the priest being that
the girdle was white, and that he wore the linen miter of the high priest
instead of the bonnet of the priest. Lev.16.4; Ex.28:39,40; 39:28. As he begins the service, the high
priest receives from the congregation two goats and a ram, which, together with
his own sin offering, a bullock, are presented before the Lord. He kills the
bullock, which is for himself, and a priest catches some of the blood in a
bowl, stirring it so that it will not coagulate while the high priest performs
another part of the service.
After the bullock is
killed, the high priest takes coals from the altar of burnt offering, and puts
them in a censer. He also takes his hands full of sweet incense, and
carrying both the coals and the incense, he goes into the tabernacle and enters
the most holy. There he places the censer on the mercy seat, "that
the cloud of the incense may cover the mercy seat that is upon the testimony,
that he die not." Lev.16:13.
Having finished this
part of the ceremony, he goes outside and receives from the priest the blood of
the bullock, which he carries into the most holy. There he sprinkles the
blood with his finger upon the mercy seat eastward, "and before the
mercy seat shall he sprinkle of the blood with his finger seven times."
Verse
14. By this act he makes "atonement
for himself and for his house." Verse 6.
Before the bullock
is killed, another ceremony has taken place. Lots have been cast upon the two
goats, one lot for the Lord and the other for the scapegoat. Verse 8. The goat upon which the lot fell for
the Lord is to be offered as a sin offering. The other, the scapegoat, is to be
presented alive before the Lord, "to make an atonement with him, and to
let him go for a scapegoat into the wilderness." Verses 9,10.
After the high
priest comes out from the most holy, having performed the ritual with the blood
of the bullock, he kills the goat of the sin offering that is for the
people. He again enters the most holy, and sprinkles the blood of the
goat as he sprinkled the blood of the bullock upon the mercy seat and before
the mercy seat. Verse 15. This
makes atonement for the most holy, "because of the uncleanness of the
children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their
sins." Verse 16.
He then does the same thing for the tabernacle of the congregation, that is,
the holy place. Having made atonement for the sanctuary, he goes out to the
altar and makes atonement for it, putting upon the horns of the altar both of
the blood of the bullock and of the blood of the goat. He sprinkles it
with his finger seven times, to "cleanse it, and hallow it from the
uncleanness of the children of Israel." Verse 19.
Having thus "made
an end of reconciling the holy place, and the tabernacle of the congregation,
and the altar, he shall bring the live goat: and Aaron shall lay both his hands
upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the
children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting
them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit
man into the wilderness: and the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities
unto a land not inhabited: and he shall let go the goat in the
wilderness." Lev.16:20-22.
This part of the
service being finished, Aaron puts off the linen garments, washes himself in
water, and puts on his regular high priestly garments. Verses 23,24. He then comes out and offers a burnt
offering for himself and one for the people. Verse 24. The fat of the sin offering is then
burned on the altar. The man who led the scapegoat into the wilderness is
to bathe himself and wash his clothes before he can come back into the
camp. The man who disposed of the bullock whose blood was brought into
the sanctuary and whose body was burned without the camp, must also wash his
clothes and bathe himself in water before he can return. Verses 26-28. The special offering mentioned in
Numbers 29:7-11, consisting of a bullock, a ram, and seven lambs for a burnt offering,
and "one kid of the goats for a sin offering; beside the sin offering
of atonement," is then offered before the regular evening sacrifice,
which closes the services of the day.
Of the work done on
that day the record states, "On that day shall the priest make an
atonement for you, to cleanse you, that ye may be clean from all your sins
before the Lord." Lev.16:30. A summary is
given in verse 33: "He shall make an atonement for the holy sanctuary,
and he shall make an atonement for the tabernacle of the congregation, and for
the altar, and he shall make an atonement for the priests, and for all the
people of the congregation."
In the reading of
the record of the Day of Atonement as given in the sixteenth chapter of
Leviticus, some questions present themselves which we shall now consider.
If the question is asked, Just what was accomplished
by the services of the Day of Atonement? the answer of course is that
atonement was made. If the further question is asked, For
whom, or for what was atonement made? the answer is, in the language of the
thirty-third verse, that atonement was made for the holy sanctuary, for the
tabernacle of the congregation, for the altar, for the priests, and for all the
people.
This divides the
atonement into two parts, atonement for the sanctuary, that is, for the holy
things; and atonement for persons, that is, for priests and people. The
purpose of the atonement for the people is said to be "to cleanse you,
that ye may be clean from all your sins before the Lord." Verse 30. As for the sanctuary, the statement is
made, "He shall make an atonement for the holy place, because of the
uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgression in
all their sins: and so shall he do for the tabernacle
of the congregation, that remaineth among them in the midst of their
uncleanness." Verse 16.
Concerning the altar it is stated, "He shall
sprinkle of the blood upon it with his finger seven times, and cleanse it, and
hallow it from the uncleanness of the children of Israel." Verse
19.
It will be noted
that the holy places and the altar were cleansed not because of any inherent
sin or evil in the sanctuary or altar as such, but "because of the
uncleanness of the children of Israel," and "because of their
transgressions in all their sins." The same is true of the
altar. The priest is to "cleanse it, and
hallow it from the uncleanness of the children of Israel." Verse 19.
These statements
make it clear that it was the sins of Israel that defiled the sanctuary and the
altar. This defilement had taken place throughout the year in the daily
ministration. Each morning and evening a lamb had been slain and its blood
sprinkled upon the altar "round about." This had defiled
the altar. Offenders had brought their sin and trespass offerings. In the
case of a priest or the whole congregation, the victim's blood had been
sprinkled in the holy place. This had defiled the sanctuary. In the
case of a ruler or one of the common people, the blood had been put upon the
horns of the altar of burnt offering, and the flesh had been eaten by the
priests. This had transferred the sins to the priesthood as well as
defiled the altar. Through these means the sanctuary and the altar had
been defiled, and the priesthood made to bear sins. The services of the
Day of Atonement were to dispose of all these sins and to cleanse both
sanctuary and priesthood as well as people.
The question may
well be raised, Why was any cleansing needed by the
people? Had they not brought their sacrifices from time to time
throughout the year, confessed their sins and gone away forgiven? Why
would they need to be forgiven twice? Why should "a remembrance"
be "made of sins every year"? Should not "the
worshipers once purged" "have had no more conscience of
sins"? Heb.10:2,3. These
questions demand an answer.
It may be pertinent
to remark that our salvation is always conditioned upon repentance and
perseverance. God forgives, but the forgiveness is not unconditional and
independent of the sinner's future course. Note how Ezekiel puts it: "When
the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and
doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he
live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in
his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, it
them shall he die." Eze.18:24.
This text states
that when a man turns away from the right, all his good deeds "shall
not be mentioned." The converse is also true. If a man has
been wicked, but turns from his evil way, "all his transgressions that
he has committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him." Verse 22.
God keeps an account
with each man. Whenever a prayer for forgiveness ascends to God from a
true heart, God forgives. But sometimes men change their minds.
They repent of their repentance. They show by their lives that their
repentance is not permanent. And so God, instead of forgiving absolutely
and finally, marks forgiveness against men's names and waits with the final
blotting out of sins until they have had time to think the matter
through. If at the end of their lives they are still of the same mind,
God counts them faithful, and in the day of judgment their record is finally
cleared. So in Israel of old. When the Day
of Atonement rolled around, each offender had a chance to show that he was
still of the same mind and wanted forgiveness. If he was, the sin was
blotted out, and he was completely cleansed.
The Day of Atonement
was the day of judgment to Israel, as evidenced by the quotations at the
beginning of this chapter. Day by day during the year, the transgressors
had appeared at the temple and received forgiveness. On the Day of
Atonement these sins came in review before God, or as Hebrews puts it, there
was "a remembrance again made of sins." Heb.10:3. On that day every true Israelite
renewed his consecration to God and confirmed his repentance. As a
result, he was not only forgiven, but cleansed. "On that day
shall the priest make an atonement for you, to cleanse you, that ye may be
clean from all your sins before the Lord." Lev.16:30. It must have been with happiness in
their hearts that Israel went home in the evening of that day. "Clean
from all your sins." Wonderful assurance! The same promise
is given in the New Testament: "If we confess our sins, He is faithful
and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all
unrighteousness." 1John 1:9. Not only forgiven, but cleansed! Cleansed from "all
unrighteousness," from "all your sins!"
O the bliss of the glorious thought --
My sin, not in part but the whole.
Of the final
judgment the revelator says: "I saw the dead,
small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book
was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those
things which were written in the book, according to their works."
Rev.20:12. "The dead were judged out of
those things which were written in the books." The Day of
Atonement was a type of that day. There were no books kept in the
sanctuary. But there was a record of sin. Every drop of blood on
the altar of burnt offering sprinkled in the morning and evening service
constituted a record of sins committed. On the horns of the same altar,
and also on the holy place, a record of sins forgiven was made by the
sprinkling of blood as sinners came with their personal sacrifices to obtain
forgiveness. On the Day of Atonement the sins of those who had already
obtained forgiveness were blotted out. The others were "cut
off." Thus the sanctuary was cleansed of the record of sin
accumulated through the year. This cleansing of the record also effected the
cleansing of the people whose sins already had been forgiven. The sins
were blotted out. They did not any longer remain as a witness against the
people. Atonement was made, and the people were not under
condemnation. They were cleansed, free, happy. Even the record
existed no more.
It now becomes our
duty to inquire just how this atonement was brought about. The observing
student will wish to know how the sanctuary can be cleansed by the sprinkling
of blood, when it was by that very means that the sanctuary was defiled.
Would not more blood still further defile, rather than cleanse? The
student will also wish to know why a bullock is used as a sin offering as well
as a goat, and what each accomplished; and lastly, why a scapegoat is
necessary.
In any study of the
sanctuary and of the levitical priesthood, it is to
be remembered that no type is an exact counterpart of that which it is intended
to portray. The real work of the atonement in heaven involves so many
factors that it is quite impossible to find an earthly parallel. Christ
lived, died, and rose again. How can a fitting type be found to
illustrate this? A lamb may represent Christ and be slain as he
was. But how can the resurrection be shown? Another live animal may
be used, but the type is not perfect.
The high priest
typified Christ. But Christ was sinless, and the priest was not.
Any offering which the high priest offered because of his own sins, could
therefore not be true to type. For these reasons various ceremonies were
necessary to illustrate the complete work of Christ; and yet they failed to
illustrate fully. The priest typified certain aspects of Christ's
ministry. So did the high priest, the veil, the shewbread, the incense,
the lamb, the goat, the meal offering, and many other items in the sanctuary
service. The holy apartment had its signification; so had the most holy,
the court, the altar, the laver, the mercy seat. Almost everything was
symbolical, from the priests' dress to the ashes used in sprinkling the
unclean. Yet all of it put together did not constitute a complete type,
and much of it did but imperfectly mirror its original.
In another chapter
the statement is stressed that Aaron not only represented the people, but was
practically identified with them. What he did, they did. What they
did, he did.
The high priest "represented
the whole people. All Israelites were reckoned as being in him."
In him "everything belonging to the priesthood gathered itself up and
reached its culmination." "When he sinned, the people
sinned."
Adam was the
representative man. By him "sin entered into the
world." By his "disobedience many were made sinners."
And so "by one man's offense death reigned by one," and "through
the offense of one many be dead." Rom.5:12,19,17,15.
Christ also was the
representative man. He was the second man and the last Adam. "The
first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from
heaven." 1Cor.15:47. This
second man, "the Lord from heaven," undid all that the first
man had done by his transgression. By the disobedience of the first man "many
were made sinners." By the obedience of the second man "shall
many be made righteous." Rom.5:19. By the offence of the first man, "judgment came upon all
men to condemnation." By the righteousness of the second man, "the
free gift came upon all men unto justification of life." Verse
18. And so, "as in Adam
all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." 1Cor.15:22.
The high priest was
a type of Christ and a representative of the nation. As a representative
of the nation, he was identified with their sins and was worthy of death.
As a type of Christ he was their mediator and savior. In either case he
transacted with God for the people. In this sense he was the
people. If God accepted him, He accepted the people in him. If God
rejected him, He rejected the people in him. For this reason the people
were anxious to hear the sound of the bells and the pomegranates on the Day of
Atonement. When at last the atonement had been effected and the
reconciliation was complete, the sound of the bells as the high priest resumed
his high-priestly garments was the sign that God had accepted the
substitute. As he stepped outside and the sound was clearly heard by all,
their joy and thankfulness were profound. God had once more accepted them
in the person of the high priest.
When the high priest
went into the most holy on the Day of Atonement, he went in as the
representative of the people. In him Israel appeared before the Lord to
give account of the sins of the year. The record of these sins appeared
in blood on the altar of burnt offering and in the holy place. With the
Day of Atonement the day of reckoning had come, the
day of judgment when all sins were to come in review before God. The high
priest appears in God's presence, while the veil of incense shields him.
For the first time that year sin is brought before God in the most holy.
The high priest sprinkles the blood of the bullock "upon the mercy seat
eastward; and before the mercy seat shall he sprinkle of the blood with his
finger seven times," and receives "atonement for himself, and
for his house." Lev.16:14,11. He
is clean. Whatever sins he is identified with, whatever sins he is
responsible for, have in figure been transferred to the sanctuary. He is
clean; but the sanctuary is not.
What has thus far
been accomplished is this: The high priest in his representative capacity has
appeared before God and the law. He has acknowledged his sins and
sprinkled the blood. The law has in effect asked:
"Have you
sinned?"
The high priest has
answered: "I have sinned, and I have confessed my sins."
The law says: "The
wages of sin is death. I have no other choice than to demand life."
The high priest
replies: "I have brought the blood of the victim. Accept it."
The blood is sprinkled
on the mercy seat. A substitute has been accepted instead of the
sinner. On this substitute the sin has been placed; it is made sin, and
as such has died. It has paid the penalty of transgression. It has
died in the sinner's place and for sin. It has paid the debt due because
of sin.
In our consideration
of sacrifices for sin, stress has been laid on the placing of hands upon the
victim's head, thus transferring sin to the victim. In each case the
victim dies with guilt upon its head, dies for sin. Thus
Christ took our sins upon Himself and was made sin. Being made sin, He
must die; for the wages of sin is death.
Christ however, died
not only for sin, but for sinners. When He died for sins He died because
He identified Himself with us and took our sins upon Himself. He died for
sins because our sins were laid upon Him, and He must bear the penalty.
Dying thus for sinners, He satisfied the claims of the law.
Christ died not only
as a substitute for the sinner, but also as the Sinless One. Taking our
sins upon Himself -- we say it reverently -- He ought to die; the law demanded
it. But personally Christ has not sinned. He was sinless; yet He
died. And the death of the Sinless One is a definite part of the plan of
God. The death of the sinner satisfies the claim of the law. The
death of the Sinless One provides the ransom and frees the sinner from death.
After the high
priest had offered the bullock and sprinkled its blood upon the mercy seat and
before the mercy seat, he was told to "kill the goat of the sin
offering, that is for the people, and bring his blood within the veil, and do
with that blood as he did with the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle it upon
the mercy seat, and before the mercy seat: and he shall make an atonement for
the holy place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and
because of their transgressions in all their sins: and so shall he do for the
tabernacle of the congregation, that remaineth among them in the midst of their
uncleanness." Lev.16:15,16.
It has before been
noted, but should here be emphasized, that the blood of the bullock and that of
the goat accomplish two different things. The first makes atonement for
Aaron and his house. The second makes atonement for the people and the sanctuary.
Verses
11,15,16. Nothing is said of the
blood of the bullock making atonement for or cleansing the sanctuary, but this
is definitely stated of the blood of the goat. Verses
15,16. This may be accounted for
on the following grounds:
In all cases where
atonement is made for a person -- with one minor exception discussed elsewhere
-- the atonement is accomplished by means of blood, and indicates transfer of
sins to the sanctuary. The sinner transfers his sins to the victim which
is slain, and the blood is sprinkled on the altar of burnt offering or in the
holy place in the sanctuary. The blood which -- because of sin having
been confessed on the victim -- might be called sin-laden blood, typically and
ceremonially defiles the place where it is sprinkled. Thus the sanctuary
is made unclean.
When the high priest
comes out after sprinkling the blood of the bullock, he is cleansed.
Whatever sins he carried for which he was responsible had been confessed and
transferred to the sanctuary. When he steps out of the most holy, he is
cleansed, free, holy, a type of Christ, the Sinless One. He has confessed
his sins, they have been forgiven him, and he has no further confession to make
for himself. The Lord's goat, whose blood he is about to sprinkle, also
typifies the Sinless One, the sin bearer. In all the offerings during the
year the death of Christ as the Sinless One was portrayed. He was made
sin who knew no sin. In the goat on the Day of Atonement He is typified as the
chosen of God, harmless, undefiled.
To repeat: In the
goat offered on the Day of Atonement we have symbolic reference to the death of
the sinless Christ "who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from
sinners, and made higher than the heavens." Heb.7:26. The blood of this goat has cleansing
efficacy. It makes possible the cleansing of the sanctuary.
The sprinkling of
the blood of the morning and evening sacrifices for the nation "covered"
all sin done throughout Israel for that particular day. The daily
sacrifice on the altar represented Christ who died for us "While we
were yet sinners;" who gave "Himself for us an offering and a
sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling savor;" who "is the
propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the
whole world." Rom.5:8; Eph.5:2; 1Jhn.2:2. The daily burnt offering is therefore symbolic of Him who gave
Himself for the sin of the world, dying for all men, thus making provision for
all who will come to Him to be saved. The sprinkling of the blood "round
about upon the altar" denotes the temporary or provisional atonement
provided, and also constitutes a record of sins committed but not as yet
individually atoned for.
The individual
offerings, such as sin, trespass, and burnt offerings, constituted, in effect,
a record of sins for which atonement was sought. The sins had already
been recorded in the daily morning and evening service. Now the
individual offenders register their repentance by bringing the required
offerings, and the blood is duly placed on the horns of the altar of burnt
offering, or sprinkled on the altar of incense, or on the veil. The blood
thus sprinkled recorded confessed sins. It has already been noted that
all confessed sins found their way eventually into the sanctuary; for in cases
where the blood was not carried directly into the sanctuary, the flesh was
eaten by the priests who thus carried sin; and when the priests offered
sacrifices for themselves, these sins would, with their own, be carried into
the holy place.
This earthly
tabernacle service was typical of the work carried on in the sanctuary above,
where a complete record is kept of sins committed and of sins confessed.
When the Day of Atonement came, all Israel were supposed to have confessed
their sins and to have that confession recorded in blood in the
sanctuary. To complete the work it was now necessary to have the record
removed, to have the sins blotted out, to cleanse the sanctuary of its blood
defilement. Before this specific cleansing was done, the high priest went
into the most holy with the blood of the bullock and made atonement for himself
and for his house. This having been done the work of cleansing
begins. The most holy is cleansed with the blood of the goat, and then
the holy. Thus the record of sin is blotted out. After this the
altar is cleansed.
"He shall
sprinkle of the blood upon it with his finger seven times, and cleanse it, and
hallow it from the uncleanness of the children of Israel." Lev.16:19. Thus he
makes "an end of reconciling the holy place, and the tabernacle of the
congregation, and the altar." Verse 20. All is now cleansed, reconciled, and atoned for.
It will be noted
that thus far in the record nothing has been said of the people's
cleansing. This is as it should be. The people had already confessed
their sins. They were forgiven. Only the record of their sins
remained, and on this day that was blotted out. And with the blotting out
of the record, that last vestige of sin is removed from the sanctuary, and the
people are clean. "On that day shall the priest make an atonement
for you, to cleanse you, that ye may be clean from all your sins before the
Lord." Lev.16:30. All
those who had sent their sins beforehand to judgment had them blotted
out. The blotting out of the record constituted the cleansing of the
people. They began the new year with a clean slate.
We would call
attention to one more thing, namely, the putting of the bullock's blood on the
horns of the altar. Verse 18. That the
goat's blood is put on the altar needs no further explanation, for that is to
cleanse it. But why the blood of the bullock?
The high priest
represents the whole people. He transacts for them with God. As
Christ's representative he typically effects atonement, so that when his work
is done on the Day of Atonement all sin has been dealt with, and all confessed
sin blotted out. When he therefore confesses these sins, he does so on
behalf of Israel and receives atonement. Hence the high priest is said to
make "atonement for you, to cleanse you, that ye may be clean from all
your sins." Verse 30.
There were doubtless
those in Israel who delayed their confession until it was too late to bring an
individual sin offering before the Day of Atonement. They were repentant,
but they had been delayed in coming to the sanctuary. Others were sick
and could not come, or were on a journey in far lands. None of these had
brought their sin or trespass offerings. Were they to be left out?
Their sins were
recorded by and in the daily morning and evening sacrifice, but no confession
had been recorded in the sanctuary, because they had brought no
sacrifice. What is to be done? The high priest puts of the blood on
the horns of the altar, thus recording confession and forgiveness for
them. He does the work which they would have done had there been time or
had they been able, and because of their repentance they are included in the
atonement. Of such are the thief on the cross and others.
Thus the work of the
Day of Atonement is finished, as far as all confessed sins are concerned.
Every one who has confessed his sins and repented of them has the assurance of
sins blotted out. He has heard the bells as the high priest resumes his
high-priestly garments, telling of the completed work. He is not only a pardoned
sinner, he is not only forgiven, he is cleansed. "If we confess
our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive our sins, and to cleanse us from
all unrighteousness." 1John 1:9. The forgiveness has been accomplished in the daily service; the
cleansing on the Day of Atonement. Even the record of sin is blotted
out. Israel is clean.
Chapter Thirteen
IN THE CONSIDERATION OF THE DAY OF Atonement we omitted one important part
of the service which deserves special treatment, namely, that of the
scapegoat. On this subject much has been written and different
interpretations have been given. We shall give that which we consider the
true view and which harmonizes best with the general purpose of the atonement.
The scapegoat is
brought into prominence on the Day of Atonement after the work of
reconciliation is complete. After Aaron "hath made an end of
reconciling the holy place, and the tabernacle of the congregation, and the
altar, he shall bring the live goat: and Aaron shall lay both his hands upon
the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the
children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting
them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit
man into the wilderness: and the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities
into a land not inhabited: and he shall let go the goat in the
wilderness." Lev.16:20-22.
It will be
remembered that the blood of the Lord's goat cleansed the holy place, the most
holy, and the altar of "the uncleanness of the children of
Israel," and "of their transgressions in all their sins."
Lev.16:16,19. It was emphasized that this was not
merely forgiveness, but cleansing. Forgiveness had been obtained in the daily
service when individual sin offerings were brought. The blood had then
been sprinkled and the sin forgiven. It is repeatedly stated that "the
priest shall make an atonement for him, and it shall be
forgiven him." Lev.4:26,31,35. The record of the sin remained, however, until the Day of
Atonement, when it was finally blotted out. This is exactly what happens
in the great day of judgment, of which the Day of Atonement was a type.
Then the books are opened, and the sins of the righteous blotted out. Acts
3:19; Rev.20:12; Dan.7:10. Those who do
not have their sins blotted out, will have their names blotted out. Ex.32:33;
Rev.3:5; Ps.69:28. This means
eternal loss.
The scapegoat served
a definite purpose in the service of the Day of Atonement. The high
priest confessed "over him all the iniquities of the children of
Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the
head of the goat." Lev.16:21. The goat
bore the sins "unto a land not inhabited." Verse 22. This ceremony removed the sins from
the camp of Israel and was the last act of the high priest before he washed
himself and resumed his usual garments. Verses 23,24.
Two questions demand
consideration: Whom or what does the scapegoat represent? and, Just what is its part in the services of the Day of
Atonement?
When lots were cast
upon the two goats taken from the congregation, one lot was for the Lord and
the other for the scapegoat. The word here used for scapegoat, Azazel,
has been the subject of much discussion. Some believe the two goats to be
symbolic of Christ, merely representing two phases of the same work.
Others believe that they represent two opposing forces, and that if one is "for
the Lord," and the other "for Azazel," the latter must
mean "for Satan." Some scholars, probably the majority,
hold that Azazel is a personal, wicked, superhuman being; others contend that
it means "one who removes," especially "by a series of
acts." It seems most reasonable to believe that as one goat is
for "the Lord," a personal being, so the other should also be
for a personal being. Moreover, as the two goats are evidently
antithetical, the most consistent view would be that which holds that Azazel
must be opposed to "the Lord." He could be no other than
Satan.
While we believe
that the weight of evidence is in favor of considering Azazel as the name of a
personal, wicked spirit, there are certain apparent difficulties which this
view brings to the front, which should have consideration. Chief among
these is the statement that the scapegoat "shall be presented alive
before the Lord, to make an atonement with him, and to let him go for a
scapegoat into the wilderness." Lev.16:10. If Azazel means "a wicked spirit,"
Satan, how can it be possible to "make an atonement with him"?
Surely, it is said, atonement cannot be made with a goat representing Satan.
We believe that a
consideration of the office of the scapegoat furnishes a solution to this
problem. After the atonement with the Lord's goat is finished, after
reconciliation and cleansing have been made for the sanctuary and the altar,
the goat for Azazel is brought out. Note, the priest has "made an
end of reconciling;" the sanctuary and the altar have been cleansed;
atonement has been made; an end has been made of cleansing; then, and not until
then, does the scapegoat appear in its special role. We therefore hold
that the scapegoat has no part in the atonement which has already been
accomplished with the blood of the Lord's goat. That work is completed.
The scapegoat has no part in it whatever.
The objection may be
made that as it is the iniquity of the children of Israel that is put upon the
head of the scapegoat, our argument cannot be sound. The text in question
reads that Aaron should "confess over him all the iniquities of the
children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting
them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit
man into the wilderness." Lev.16:21. Let us consider this.
Most sins committed
admit of shared responsibility. The person committing the sin is often mostly
to blame, but this is not always the case. Some people are more sinned
against than sinning. The man who educates a child to steal for him,
cannot escape responsibility by saying that he himself has not stolen.
The one who lures a girl into sin, though not participating in it himself, is
guilty. The parents who fail to instill right principles into their
children, must someday give an account. This is as it should be.
Responsibility for sin is seldom traceable to one person only. Ordinarily
it is shared.
This is particularly
true of Satan's share in the sins of the righteous. The true Christian
does not wish to sin. He abhors it. But Satan tempts him. A thousand
times the man resists, and a thousand times Satan comes back. At last the
man yields; he sins. But he soon repents; he asks forgiveness. The
sin has been recorded in heaven. Now forgiveness is placed against
it. The man is happy. He is forgiven. The Lord has been
gracious to him. Then comes the judgment. The sin is blotted
out. The man's record is clear. But what about Satan's part in the
sin? Has that been atoned for? It has not. Satan must atone
for it himself with his life.
Ideally the
Christian should not sin. Yet there is the possibility. An incident
that occurred years ago may be of interest:
In a certain
college, a student janitor was attempting to close the windows during the
convocation in chapel. He was quietly walking along the outside aisle
with a long pole upraised, his eyes on the windows. A fellow student saw
an excellent opportunity that he felt should not pass unimproved. As the
young man with the pole passed by, intent on his work, the student put out his
foot, and with a resounding crash janitor and pole went to the floor. A
prompt rebuke for his clumsiness was as promptly rescinded when the
circumstances were understood. One man did the falling. The other
was responsible.
So, ideally, it
should be with the Christian. He may fall but if he does, it should only
be because Satan trips him up. But often he himself is to blame, at least
partly. He tempts Satan to tempt him, and he cannot escape his share of
the responsibility. It would not be just to blame Satan entirely for that
of which we ourselves are partakers. On the other hand, Satan cannot
escape his share. He is the instigator of sin. He continually
tempts men. He is a partaker of all sins committed.
It is conceivable
that some men have come to the place where they enjoy sin, and where Satan
hardly needs to urge them on. While Satan must bear the first
responsibility, the men themselves must bear their share. Not so with the
righteous. They hate sin; they loathe and abhor it. But Satan is
continually on their track. Sometimes he succeeds in tripping them.
He must bear his share of the responsibility.
Thus every sin
involves joint responsibility. Satan has a part in them all. When,
on the Day of Atonement, the faithful in Israel had their sins blotted out, it
was because they had previously repented and been forgiven. Their share
in each sin was atoned for, but not Satan's. He had not repented; he had
not confessed; he had not by faith placed his sin on the great Sin
Bearer. He must therefore bear the sin himself. And so the sins of
Israel which he has tempted them to commit are placed on him.
But this does not
constitute a blood atonement in any way. There is no blood shed.
The goat for Azazel is not killed. The blood is not sprinkled. It is
not carried into the holy place. It is not put upon the horns of the
altar. The flesh is not eaten by the priests. The body is not
burned without the camp. The fat is not put upon the altar, nor the
inwards washed and burned. None of the things which constitute an
offering or sacrifice for sins is done. The goat atones for sins, only in
the way a criminal atones for his sins by suffering the penalty of the law.
We therefore believe
that Azazel represents Satan, and that as such he has no part whatever in the
atonement effected by our Lord. The first goat represents Christ.
His blood is shed, and by means of it the sanctuary, is cleansed. Not
until this is done and completed, does the goat for Azazel appear. This
goat accomplishes a definite work which we shall now consider, but this in no
way affects or influences the atonement already completed. This point
should be emphasized.
If the view here
presented is correct, we have in the two goats a complete extermination of all
sin. The sins of God's people are atoned for in the blood of the Lord's
goat. The sanctuary is clean; the people are clean; the priesthood is
clean. Into this cleansing we cannot admit Satan. He has no place
in it. Christ did a complete work and does not need Satan's help.
Satan, typified by the scapegoat, atones for his own sins, and for his part in
those sins which he has caused others to commit.
There are sins other
than those committed by God's people. Christ died for all men; but all
men do not choose to avail themselves of His atonement. Hence, they must bear
their own sins and the penalty of them. Christ has died for them.
He has borne their sins. But the time is coming when He will bear them no
longer. Upon Satan as the originator and instigator of sin will be put
all the sins for which he is responsible.
When the two goats
therefore were set before the Lord on the Day of Atonement, they represented
Christ and Satan. The people could choose one or the other as their
representative. If they chose the Lord's goat, they identified themselves
with Christ. If they chose not to accept the proffered pardon, they
automatically allied themselves with the powers of evil. The choice was
before them. On that choice hung their destiny.
It has been
mentioned before, that the whole service of the Day of Atonement is symbolic of
the day of judgment. The final judgment includes more than the blotting
out of the sins of the righteous. It includes the eradication of sin from
the universe. It includes placing upon the head of Satan all sin for
which he is responsible. It includes the eventual "cutting
off" of all who have not afflicted their souls. So in the
sanctuary service the sins were placed on the head of the scapegoat after the
cleansing of the sanctuary had been completed. Then those who had not
repented were "cut off." Lev.16:20-22; 23-29.
"When the
ministration in the holy of holies had been completed, and the sins of Israel
had been removed from the sanctuary by virtue of the blood of the sin offering,
then the scapegoat was presented alive before the Lord; and in the presence of
all the congregation the high priest confessed over him 'all the iniquities of
the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting
them upon the head of the goat.' In like manner, when the work of
atonement in the heavenly sanctuary has been completed, then in the presence of
God and heavenly angels, and the host of the redeemed, the sins of God's people
will be placed upon Satan; he will be declared guilty of all the evil which he
has caused them to commit. And as the scapegoat was sent away into a land
not inhabited, so Satan will be banished to the desolate earth, an uninhabited
and dreary wilderness." --The Great
Controversy, p.658.
"As the priest,
in removing the sins from the sanctuary, confessed them upon the head of the
scapegoat, so Christ will place all these sins upon Satan, the originator and
instigator of sin. The scapegoat, bearing the sins of Israel, was sent away
'unto a land not inhabited;' so Satan, bearing the guilt of all the sins which
he has caused God's people to commit, will be for a thousand years confined to
the earth, which will then be desolate, without inhabitant, and he will at last
suffer the full penalty of sin in the fires that shall destroy all the
wicked. Thus the great plan of redemption will
reach its accomplishment in the final eradication of sin, and the deliverance
of all who have been willing to renounce evil."--Id., pp.485,486.
The banishment of
the scapegoat represents the final eradication of sin. He therefore plays an
important part in the services of the Day of Atonement. In him sin is
finally destroyed and Israel is safe.
The Day of Atonement
was the great day in Israel. On that day there was a division of the
people into two groups. The one group afflicted their souls. They
had confessed their sins; they had made restitution and brought their
offering. Now they awaited the outcome. When the bells of the high
priest were heard as he finished the work of atonement, they knew that all was
well. God had accepted them. They were cleansed, happy, free.
Their sins were blotted out.
The other group had
no part in the atonement. They had not afflicted their souls. They
had not confessed nor made restitution. Now their sins returned upon their own
heads. They were "cut off."
Thus the Day of
Atonement was the great day of division. There were two classes on that day,
and only two. One was forgiven, cleansed, saved. The other was
unrepentant, filthy, "cut off." Each had made his own
decision. Their decision settled their destiny. When the day was
done, the camp was clean. One of two things had happened to each
person. Sin had been removed from him, or he himself had been removed.
In either case the camp was clean.
Thus it shall be in
the end of the world. "It shall come to pass, that he that is
left in Zion, and he that remaineth in Jerusalem, shall be called holy, even
every one that is written among the living in Jerusalem." Isa.4:3. God shall again cleanse His
people. "Those that remain in Zion shall be holy, every one that
is written among the living in Jerusalem." The rest will be
shaken out, cut off.
It must have been
with profound feelings that Israel witnessed the final removal of sin from the
camp. When the goat was led away carrying its load of sin, they knew that
but for the grace of God they would themselves be carrying their sins to
execution. They had seen the Lord's goat die. It had died for
them. Now they had visibly presented to them the removing of sin from
Israel. The goat was being led away to a fate unknown. Eventually,
death would result. That also would have been their doom unless the Lord
had helped them.
The type is not in
all respects true to facts. In the final disposition of sin, the wicked
are destroyed. This was not done in Israel. They were "cut
off." That ordinarily meant exclusion from the privileges of
Israel, or what we would now mean by exclusion from the church. It was
therefore possible for an unrepentant sinner to see the scapegoat being led
away and excluded from the camp. That was typical to him of his own
exclusion. He would no longer have any part in Israel. He was being cut
off from God's people, an outcast, fit only for destruction. This would
constitute a powerful object lesson to him, and might lead to serious
reflection and repentance.
Chapter Fourteen
IN THE TWENTY-THIRD CHAPTER OF LEVITICUS are recorded the feasts and holy
convocations which the Lord commanded His people to observe. There are
seven in all. Three of them are the great festivals of the year, the
Passover, Pentecost, and the Feast of Tabernacles. Of these it is
written: "Three times in a year shall all thy males appear before the
Lord thy God in the place which He shall choose; in the Feast of Unleavened
Bread, and in the Feast of Weeks, and in the Feast of Tabernacles: and they
shall not appear before the Lord empty." Deut.16:16.
(See also Ex.23:17; 34:23.)
The two words used
to denote "feasts" and "holy convocations"
differ considerably in their meaning. Hag, which belongs especially to the
three feasts above named, means "a joyous occasion, a festival, a
feast." Moadeem has reference rather
to appointed times, stated observances, holy convocations, or solemn
meetings. An example of Moadeem would be the
Day of Atonement, which was not a feast or festival in any sense of the word,
but a holy convocation. Lev.23:26-32.
Besides the
Passover, Pentecost, the Feast of Tabernacles, and the Day of Atonement, there
were three others, namely, the Feast of Trumpets, occurring on the first day of
the seventh month, the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and the Feast of First
Fruits. Lev.23:24,6,9-14; Ex.12:17; Num.28:17. The two last-named feasts were celebrated in connection with the
observance of the Passover, but are plainly spoken of
as distinct from it. Ex.12:12,15,17; Num.28:16,17; Lev.23:9-14. As they are mentioned separately and
as they have special significance, we are placing them among the seven feasts
of the Lord.
The Passover was
observed on the fourteenth day of the first month, the Feast of Unleavened
Bread began on the fifteenth day of the same month, and the first fruits were
waved on the sixteenth day. Lev.23:5,6,11. The
first three feasts thus came in the first month of the year. The last
three feasts came in the seventh month: the Feast of Trumpets on the first day,
the Day of Atonement on the tenth day, and the Feast of Tabernacles on the
fifteenth day. Verses 24,27,39.
The Feast of Pentecost came between these two groups of feasts, fifty days from
the "morrow after the sabbath," by which is meant the
sixteenth day of Abib, the first month. This would bring Pentecost in the
latter part of the third month of the Jewish year, our May or June. Verses
15,16.
The Passover
The Passover was
instituted as a memorial of Israel's deliverance from Egyptian bondage. On the
tenth day of the first mouth a lamb was selected for each household, "according
to the number of the souls," or if the household was small, two or
more households could unite about one sacrifice. The lamb was kept until
the fourteenth day, when it was killed in the evening, and the blood sprinkled
on the doorposts. Ex.12:1-7. The
same night the flesh was eaten, not boiled as usual, but roasted. Only
unleavened bread could be used, "and with bitter herbs they shall eat
it." Verse 8. In
later years, there were some modifications of this ritual, but the essential
points remained the same.
The Passover sacrifice
is distinguished by being called "My sacrifice." Ex. 23:18;
34:25. While it is probably not
best to stress such an expression, it is at least worthy of notice. The
Passover commemorated Israel's departure from Egypt. The New Testament
makes it also a forward-looking ordinance. "Christ our Passover
is sacrificed for us." 1Cor.5:7. With this symbolic representation in mind, some analogies are
easily perceivable. In the crucifixion not a bone of Christ's body was
broken. John 19:36. Not a
bone of the Passover lamb must be broken. Ex.12:46; Num.9:12. The Passover was killed the fourteenth
day of Abib and eaten on the fifteenth. Ex.12:6-10. Christ died at Passover time. John
19.14. The sprinkling of the
blood meant a "passing over" in mercy, a deliverance from
death. Ex.12:13. So
through His blood there has been a passing over of the sins done aforetimes. Rom.3:24. The Passover sacrifice was a lamb. Ex.12:3. So Christ was "the Lamb of
God." John 1:29.
The lamb was to be without blemish. Ex.12:5. So Christ was without blemish. 1Peter 1:19. The flesh of the lamb was to be eaten. Ex.12:7. So we are to partake of His flesh. John
6:51.
Closely connected
with the Passover, yet distinguished from it, was the Feast of Unleavened
Bread. The two feasts were in reality part of the same observance, so
that the names are used interchangeably; yet in purpose they were somewhat
different. The command of God was explicit as to what should be
done. "Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread; even the first
day ye shall put away leaven out of your houses: for whosoever eateth leavened bread from the first day until the seventh
day, that soul shall be cut off from Israel." Ex.12:15. God's commentary on this reads: "Let
us keep the feasts, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and
wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." 1Cor.5:8.
The Passover and the
Feast of Unleavened Bread are fruitful in their teachings of gospel
truths. In the slain lamb, provision was made for saving the
first-born. But the death of the lamb was not enough to assure
salvation. The blood must be struck on the doorpost. There must be
individual application of the sacrifice. The sprinkling of the blood was
as important as the death of the lamb. Yet this was not enough. The
flesh must be eaten, and it must be eaten under proper conditions. "Thus
shall ye eat it; with your loins girded, your shoes on your feet, and your
staff in your hand; and ye shall eat it in haste: it is the Lord's
Passover." Ex.12:11. And even
this was not enough. All leaven must be purged away. "Whosoever
eateth that which is leavened, even that soul shall
be cut off from the congregation of Israel, whether he be a stranger, or born
in the land." Verse 19.
The Passover is
symbolic of Christ's death. He is our Passover. 1Cor.5:7. On the cross He died for us.
Provision was there made for every one to be saved who abides by the conditions
of life. But the cross itself saves no one. It only provides
salvation. There must be individual application of the blood provided.
The command to
Israel was: "Take a bunch of hyssop and dip it in the blood that is in
the bason, and strike the lintel and the two side
posts with the blood that is in the bason." Ex.12:22. The promise was that if they did this, then when
the Lord "seeth the blood upon the lintel, and on the two side posts,
the Lord will pass over the door, and will not suffer the destroyer to come in
unto your houses to smite you." Verse 23. The provisions here mentioned saved the
first-born from the destroying angel. The death of the lamb provided the
means of salvation; the application of the blood made efficacious the means
provided. Both were necessary.
It is one thing to
be saved from death. It is another to have the means of sustaining life.
This was provided positively in the eating of the flesh, negatively in the
abstention from leaven. Christ says: "I am the living bread which
came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread,
he shall live forever: and the bread that I will give is My flesh, which I will
give for the life of the world." John 6:51. Israel was told to roast the lamb entire. The command was to "roast
with fire; his head with his legs, and with the purtenance thereof." Ex.12:9. Each family was to gather a sufficient
number of people together so that all the flesh would be eaten. Verse 4. Nothing was to he carried out of the
house, and nothing left until morning. Whatever remained of those parts
that could not be eaten was to be burned. Verses 10,46. This could prefigure nothing else than
an entire assimilation of Him whom the lamb represented by those for whom the
blood was shed. It means the entire identification of Christ and the
believer. It means the acceptance of the fullness of God.
Leaven was to be
entirely excluded. We are not left in doubt as to the spiritual meaning
of leaven. It stands for malice and wickedness. 1Cor.5.8. It stands for false doctrine as
exemplified in the teachings of the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the
Herodians. Matt.16:6; Mark 8:15.
The leaven of the Pharisees is greed and injustice (Matt.23:14), a dog-in-the-manger spirit (verse
13), false zeal (verse 15), wrong estimates of spiritual values (verses
16-22), omission of judgment, mercy,
and faith (verse 23), vain
punctiliousness (verse 24),
hypocrisy (verses 25-28),
intolerance (verses 29-33),
cruelty (verses 34-36).
The leaven of the Sadducees is skepticism (Matt 22:23), lack of knowledge of the Scripture and of
the power of God (verse 29).
The leaven of the Herodians is flattery, worldliness, and hypocrisy (Matt.22,16-21), and plotting evil against God's servants (Mark
3-6).
The New Testament
counterpart of the Passover is found in the Lord's supper, the communion
service. After Christ had come, there could be no more virtue in slaying
the Passover lamb, prefiguring His coming. But there would be virtue in
commemorating the sacrifice of Calvary, and its sustaining power. For
this reason the Lord instituted the sacrificial meal of communion to call to
mind the facts of our salvation and the provisions made on the cross.
Like its prototype, it points both backward and forward. We are to
remember Calvary "till He come." 1Cor.11:26.
"These types
were fulfilled, not only as to the event, but as to the time. On the fourteenth
day of the first Jewish month, the very day and month on which, for fifteen
long centuries, the Passover lamb had been slain, Christ, having eaten the Passover
with His disciples, instituted that feast which was to commemorate His own
death as 'the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.' That
same night He was taken by wicked hands, to be crucified and slain. And
as the antitype of the wave sheaf, our Lord was raised from the dead on the
third day, 'the first fruits of them that slept,' a sample of all the
resurrected just, whose 'vile body' shall be changed, and 'fashioned like unto
His glorious body.'" --The Great Controversy, p.399.
The observance of
the presentation of the first fruits was a part of the celebration of the days
of unleavened bread. The presentation took place on the "morrow
after the sabbath" the sixteenth day of Abib. Lev.23:11. This day was not one of holy convocation, nor was
it a sabbath, but an important work was nevertheless done on that day. On
the fourteenth day of Abib a certain portion of a field of barley was marked
off to be cut down in preparation for the presentation on the sixteenth.
Three selected men cut the barley in the presence of witnesses, having already
tied the sheaves together before cutting them. After being cut, the sheaves
were all tied together into one sheaf and presented before the Lord as "a
sheaf of the first fruits." "He shall wave the sheaf
before the Lord, to be accepted for you: on the morrow after the sabbath the
priest shall wave it." Lev.23:11. Besides this, "a he-lamb without blemish," and a
meal offering mingled with oil, and a drink offering were offered to God. Verses
12,13. Not until this was done
could Israel begin to use any of the fruits of the field.
This offering was an
acceptance offering. It was a presentation of the first fruits.
Doubtless it has reference, first of all to "Christ the first fruits;
afterward they that are Christ's at His coming." 1Cor.15:23.
If we sum up the
teachings of the Passover observance, we have the following important
reflections: The Passover is symbolic of the death of Christ. As the
Passover lamb died, so Christ died. The blood of the lamb delivered
Israel of old from the destroying angel. The blood of Christ now
reconciles.
The Passover is
symbolic of the resurrection as typified in the wave sheaf. The type is
perfect even as to time. The lamb died on the evening of the fourteenth day
of Abib. On the sixteenth, the "morrow after the sabbath,"
the first fruits, which had previously been cut down, were presented before the
Lord. Christ died Friday evening. He rested in the grave over the
Sabbath. The "morrow after the Sabbath," "Christ
the first fruits" was raised from the grave and presented Himself
before the Lord for acceptance. The "morrow after the sabbath"
was not "a holy convocation," nor a sabbath, either in type or
antitype, but an important work was done that may need amplification.
When Christ arose
the first day of the week, it was necessary for Him to ascend to the Father to
hear the words of God's acceptance of the sacrifice. On the cross His
soul was in darkness. The Father hid His face from Him. In despair
and agony He cried out: "My God, My God, why
hast Thou forsaken Me?" Matt.27:46.
"Satan with his
fierce temptations wrung the heart of Jesus. The Saviour could not see
through the portals of the tomb. Hope did not present to Him His coming
forth from the grave a conqueror, or tell Him of the Father's acceptance of the
sacrifice. He feared that sin was so offensive to God, that their separation
was to be eternal. Christ felt the anguish which the sinner will feel
when mercy shall no longer plead for the guilty race. It was the sense of
sin, bringing the Father's wrath upon Him as man's substitute, that made the
cup He drank so bitter, and broke the heart of the Son of God." --The Desire of
Ages, p.753.
Now the resurrection
had taken place. The first thing Christ must do was to appear in the
presence of the Father and hear from Him the blessed words that His death has
not been in vain, but that the sacrifice was accepted as amply
sufficient. So He must ascend to the heavens above and in the presence of
the universe hear from the Father Himself the words of assurance; then He must
come back to earth again to those who were yet sorrowing for His death, not
knowing that He had been raised, and show Himself openly. This He did.
"Jesus refused
to receive the homage of His people until He had the assurance that His
sacrifice was accepted by the Father. He ascended to the heavenly courts,
and from God Himself heard the assurance that His atonement for the sins of men
had been ample, that through His blood all might gain eternal life. The
Father ratified the covenant made with Christ, that He would receive repentant
and obedient men, and would love them even as He loves His Son. Christ
was to complete His work, and fulfill His pledge to 'make a man more precious
than fine gold; even a man than the golden wedge of Ophir.' All power in
heaven and on earth was given to the Prince of life, and He returned to His
followers in a world of sin, that He might impart to them of His power and
glory.
"While the
Saviour was in God's presence, receiving gifts for His church, the disciples
thought upon His empty tomb, and mourned and wept. The day that was a day
of rejoicing to all heaven was to the disciples a day of uncertainty,
confusion, and perplexity."--Id., pp.790-793.
The scriptures were
fulfilled to the letter. "Christ arose from the dead as the first
fruits of those that slept. He was the antitype of the wave sheaf, and
His resurrection took place on the very day when the wave sheaf was to be
presented before the Lord. For more than a thousand years this symbolic
ceremony had been performed. From the harvest fields the first heads of
ripened grain were gathered, and when the people went up to Jerusalem to the
Passover, the sheaf of first fruits was waved as a thank offering before the
Lord. Not until this was presented, could the sickle be put to the grain,
and it be gathered into sheaves. The sheaf dedicated to God represented
the harvest. So Christ the first fruits represented the great spiritual
harvest to be gathered for the kingdom of God. His
resurrection, is the type and pledge of the resurrection of all the
righteous dead. 'For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even
so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with Him.'
"As Christ
arose, He brought from the grave a multitude of captives; the earthquake at His
death had rent open their graves, and when He arose, they came forth with
Him. They were those who had been colaborers
with God, and who at the cost of their lives had borne testimony to the
truth. Now they were to be witnesses for Him who had raised them from the
dead."--Id., pp.785,786.
The Passover is
typical of communion. The eating of the Passover lamb brought together
families and neighbors. It was a communal meal typifying deliverance.
An exchange had been effected, and their firstborn was
spared because the lamb died. Such a deliverance called for
consecration. All sin must be put aside. There must be no leaven
anywhere. Every corner must be examined, every nook searched for traces
of it. "Holiness unto the Lord." Nothing less would be
accepted.
All this and more
the Passover meant to Israel of old. As the Lord's supper is the New
Testament substitute for "the Lord's Passover," it should mean
no less to us than it did to them. There is grave danger that we forget
or fail to appreciate the wonderful blessings God has in store for those who "worthily"
partake of the ordinances of the Lord's house. We would do well to study
the Passover as given to Israel, that we may appreciate more the Christ who is
our real Passover Lamb, and whose death is commemorated in the communion
service.
Pentecost
Pentecost came fifty
days after the presentation of the wave sheaf on the sixteenth of Abib.
From that day "shall ye number fifty days; and ye shall offer a new
meat offering unto the Lord. Ye shall bring out of your habitations two
wave loaves of two tenth deals: they shall be of fine flour; they shall be baken with leaven; they are the first fruits unto the
Lord." Lev.23:16,17.
As the wave sheaf
was presented at the beginning of the harvest before any of the new yield could
be used, so Pentecost came at the end of the harvest of all grains, not only of
barley as in the case of the wave sheaf, and represented the joyous
acknowledgment of Israel's dependence upon God as the giver of all good
gifts. At this time it was not a sheaf that was
presented, but two wave loaves of fine flour, baked with leaven, together with "seven
lambs without blemish of the first year, and one young bullock, and two
rams." Verses 17,18. This
was accompanied by a goat for a sin offering and two lambs for a peace
offering. Verse 19.
In the Passover
celebration, it was particularly enjoined that no leaven was to be eaten or
found. At Pentecost two loaves were to be presented, "baken with leaven." Verse 17. The wave sheaf is "Christ the first fruits."
He was without sin. The bread is not God's immediate creation. It
is partly man's work. It is imperfect, it is mixed with leaven. But
it is accepted. It is waved "before the Lord, with the two lambs:
they shall be holy to the Lord for the priest." Verse 20.
Pentecost is
symbolic of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. As the wave loaves were
offered fifty days after the wave sheaf was presented, so there were just fifty
days between the resurrection of Christ and the outpouring of the Spirit on
Pentecost. Acts 2:1-4. Forty
of these days Christ spent on earth instructing and helping His disciples. Acts
1:3. Then He ascended, and for ten days the eleven
disciples continued in prayer and supplication until "the day of
Pentecost was fully come." With Pentecost came the fullness of
the Spirit.
These ten days were
important ones for the church on earth. They were also important in
heaven. When Christ "ascended up on high, He led captivity
captive, and gave gifts unto men." Eph.4:8. Those who had been raised at Christ's death and had come "out
of the graves after His resurrection," ascended with Him to heaven,
and were then presented before the Father as a kind of first fruits of the
resurrection. Matt.27:52,53.
"All heaven was
waiting to welcome the Saviour to the celestial courts. As He ascended,
He led the way, and the multitude of captives set free at His resurrection
followed. The heavenly host, with shouts and acclamations of praise and
celestial song, attended the joyous train.
"As they draw
near to the city of God, the challenge is given by the escorting angels, --
'Lift up your heads, O ye gates;
And be ye lift up, ye everlasting doors;
And the King of glory shall come in!'
"Joyfully the
waiting sentinels respond, --
'Who is this King of glory?'
"This they say,
not because they know not who He is, but because they would hear the answer of
exalted praise--
'The Lord strong and mighty,
The Lord mighty in battle!
Lift up your heads, O ye gates;
Even lift them up, ye everlasting doors;
And the King of glory shall come in!'
"Again is heard
the challenge, 'Who is this King of glory?' for the angels never weary of
hearing His name exalted. The escorting angels make reply--
'The Lord of hosts;
He is the King of glory!'
"Then the
portals of the city of God are opened wide, and the angelic throng sweep
through the gates amid a burst of rapturous music.
"There is the
throne, and around it the rainbow of promise. There are cherubim and
seraphim. The commanders of the angel hosts, the sons of God, the
representatives of the unfallen worlds, are assembled. The heavenly
council before which Lucifer had accused God and the Son, the representatives of
those sinless realms over which Satan had thought to establish his dominion,
--all are there to welcome the Redeemer. They are eager to celebrate His
triumph and to glorify their King.
"But He waves
them back. Not yet; He cannot now receive the coronet of glory and the
royal robe. He enters into the presence of His Father. He points to
His wounded head, the pierced side, the marred feet; He lifts His hands,
bearing the print of nails. He points to the tokens of His triumph; He
presents to God the wave sheaf, those raised with Him as representatives of
that great multitude who shall come forth from the grave at His second
coming. He approaches the Father, with whom there is joy over one sinner
that repents; who rejoices over one with singing. Before the foundations
of the earth were laid, the Father and the Son had united in a covenant to
redeem man if he should be overcome by Satan. They had clasped their
hands in a solemn pledge that Christ should become the surety for the human
race. This pledge Christ has fulfilled. When upon the cross He
cried out, 'It is finished,' He addressed the Father. The compact had
been fully carried out. Now He declares, 'Father, it is finished. I
have done Thy will, O My God. I have completed the work of redemption.
If Thy justice is satisfied,' 'I will that they also, whom Thou hast given Me,
be with Me where I am.'
"The voice of
God is heard proclaiming that justice is satisfied. Satan is vanquished.
Christ's toiling, struggling ones on earth are 'accepted in the Beloved.'
Before the heavenly angels and the representatives of unfallen worlds, they are
declared justified. Where He is, there His church shall be. 'Mercy and truth
are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed each other.' The Father's
arms encircle His Son, and the word is given, 'Let all the angels of God
worship Him.'
"With joy
unutterable, rulers and principalities and powers acknowledge the supremacy of
the Prince of life. The angel host prostrate themselves before Him, while
the glad shout fills all the courts of heaven, 'Worthy is the Lamb that was
slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honor, and
glory, and blessing!'" --The Desire of
Ages, pp.833,884.
"When Christ
passed within the heavenly gates, He was enthroned amidst the adoration of the
angels. As soon as this ceremony was completed, the Holy Spirit descended
upon the disciples in rich currents, and Christ was indeed glorified, even with
the glory which He had with the Father from all eternity. The Pentecostal
outpouring was Heaven's communication that the Redeemer's inauguration was
accomplished. According to His promise He had sent the Holy Spirit from
heaven to His followers, as a token that He had, as priest and king, received
all authority in heaven and on earth, and was the Anointed One over His
people." --Acts of the Apostles, p.38.
Feast of Trumpets
The Feast of
Trumpets came on the first day of the eleventh month, and was preparatory to the
Day of Atonement which came on the tenth day of the month. It was a
solemn call to all Israel to prepare to meet their God. It announced to
them that the day of judgment was coming, and that they must get ready for
it. It was a merciful reminder to them of the need of confession and
consecration. As we have elsewhere discussed the matter of atonement, it
may not be necessary here to emphasize either the Feast of Trumpets or the Day
of Atonement.
Feast of Tabernacles
This was the last
feast of the year and came ordinarily in the latter part of our October, after
the harvest was over and the fruit gathered. It was a joyous occasion for
all. The Day of Atonement was past, all misunderstandings had been
cleared up, all sins confessed and put aside. Israel was happy, and their
happiness found expression in the Feast of Tabernacles.
The feast began with
a day of holy convocation. Lev.23:35. The people
were to take "boughs of goodly trees, branches of palm trees, and the
boughs of thick trees, and willows of the brook; and ye shall rejoice before
the Lord your God seven days." Verse 40. These branches they were to make into booths, and in these they
were to live during the feast. On the Day of Atonement they were to "afflict
their souls." At the Feast of Tabernacles
they were to "rejoice before the Lord your God seven days."
It was altogether the most happy occasion of the year
when friends and neighbors renewed communion and dwelt together in love and
harmony. In this respect it was prophetic of the time when the great
ingathering of God's people shall take place, and they shall come "from
the east and the west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob,
in the kingdom of heaven." Matt.8:11.
The Feast of
Tabernacles was commemorative of the time when Israel lived in tents in the
wilderness during their forty years of wandering. "Thou shalt
remember that thou wast a bondman in Egypt: and thou shalt observe and do these
statutes. Thou shalt observe the Feast of Tabernacles seven days, after that
thou hast gathered in thy corn and thy wine: and thou shalt rejoice in thy
feast, thou, and thy son, and thy daughter, and thy manservant, and thy
maidservant, and the Levite, the stranger, and the fatherless, and the widow,
that are within thy gates. Seven days shalt thou keep a solemn feast unto
the Lord thy God in the place which the Lord shall choose: because the Lord thy
God shall bless thee in all thine increase, and in all the works of thine
hands, therefore thou shalt surely rejoice." Deut.16:12-15.
It is well to
remember how God has led us in times past. It is well to bring to mind
His providences. We are sometimes inclined to complain. Might it
not be well to think of the many blessings God has bestowed upon us, and the
wonderful way He has led us? It would make us more appreciative and
thankful. And that is a vital part of religion.
Chapter Fifteen
EVERY SACRIFICE OFFERED WAS IN REALITY a prayer to God for help. It
might be, as in the case of sin and trespass offering, a prayer for
forgiveness. Or it might be a prayer of thanksgiving and praise as in the
peace offering. Again it might be a prayer of consecration and dedication
as in the burnt offering, or of communion as in the meal offering. It
might be a prayer of thanksgiving for a special deliverance, or a prayer for a
thing much desired as in the vow and freewill offering. Or it might be
that God had healed of a sickness, or a woman had been brought safely through
childbirth, or some great deliverance had been wrought. All such
occasions called for special thanksgiving and praise and an appropriate
offering.
In its highest
exercise, prayer is communion. This needs to be emphasized, for to many Christians prayer is merely a means of getting
something from God. They feel their lack in certain respects. What
easier way is there than to ask God for that which they need? Has not God
promised to supply that which we lack? As a result of this way of
thinking, many prayers consist mostly of asking for things, some of them good,
some not so good, some positively harmful, some impossible of
fulfillment. To such people God is the source of supply, the great giver,
the inexhaustible fountain of gifts. All they need to do is ask, and God
will do the rest. They measure their Christianity by the answers they
receive to their petitions, and feel that their prayers are not effective when
the request is denied. Their prayers mostly take the form of
petition. They are continually asking for something, and they believe
that God does or should answer their petition. As the prodigal son, they
pray, "Father, give me." Luke 15:12.
It cannot be denied
that prayers of petition -- asking for things -- are a legitimate form of
prayer. We shall always need to ask God for the things we desire.
But it is to be emphasized that prayers of petition must not become the
prevailing form of prayer. Prayers of praise, thanksgiving, and adoration
must always have the preeminence.
Submissiveness to the will of God, complete dedication to Him, and thorough
consecration would indicate the form prayers should take. When our
prayers are changed from an effort to get God to do what we want into an
intense desire to find out what God wants, our prayers will not so often take
the form of asking merely for things, and demanding that God forth-with answer
our prayers in the specific way we desire.
It would indeed be
better for most of us to cease asking for things for a while and concentrate
our entire efforts on what God wants us to have or to be. When we find
this out we are on sure ground. Then we can ask of God, confident that
His will is to be done. The great problem confronting us is to find out
God's will, and then search our hearts to make sure that we really want God's
will to be ours.
Some one has said
that prayers are an effort on the part of the petitioner to have God change His
mind. Many are making no effort to find out what God wants, although they are
very clear themselves on what they want. Their prayer is really, "Thy
will be changed," not, "Thy will be done." They
are struggling with God. They are agonizing in prayer. They are demanding
of God that which they believe should be done. It does not occur to them
that the first thing to find out is, Does God really want me to have the thing
that I so much desire? Is it for my good? Is it God's will? Has the
time come for it to be done? Is there something I must do first? Am I
really willing to submit everything to God, so that if He does not give me what
I desire, I will be satisfied and thank Him for what He does give; or am I
really more intent on getting what I want than I am on ascertaining God's will?
It may be well to
enumerate some things that prayer is not. It is not a substitute for
work. A Christian confronted with a hard problem has a right to ask God's
help and to expect that He will respond. But this does not excuse him
from hard, taxing labor. God will strengthen the intellect, He will
invigorate the mind; but He will not accept prayer as a substitute for mental
effort or give to those who are merely slothful. Such as are capable of
learning the multiplication table and have the opportunity to do so, must not
shun the effort necessary, trusting that God through prayer will do for them
that which will make unnecessary any mental exertion. In most cases, work
and prayer go together. Neither one is sufficient in itself.
The aim of prayer is
not merely to get God to do something we want. Some apply worldly methods
and have a worldly philosophy in their approach to prayer. They have
learned that as far as the world is concerned, to get anything they must "go
for it," and so they take for granted that to get anything out of God
they must "go for it." They act as though God were not
willing to grant their petition without a great deal of coaxing, and seem to
believe that by persistency and wheedling they can get out of God that which He
would not otherwise give them. They take the importunate widow as their
example, not seeming to realize that this parable is given to show what God is
not. No one can get out of God that which he desires, merely by
continually annoying Him. It needs to be emphasized that God is not like
the unjust judge. He is a father, more willing to give good gifts to His
children than they are to receive them. Wheedling, coaxing, cajoling,
teasing, annoying, mere persistency, does not avail with God.
The impression must
not prevail, however, that there is no such thing as wrestling in prayer, or
that we need only mention to God once and for all what we want and it will be
forthcoming. Prayer is not quite as simple as that. No, there is
need of agonizing, prevailing prayer, prayer that goes to the heart of things,
and is not satisfied till lives and things are changed. Jesus prayed all
night; Jacob wrestled with the angel; Daniel sought the Lord with prayer and
fasting; Paul besought the Lord again and again. We need not less
prayers, but more. And we need to learn to pray in faith. This
perhaps is the vital point.
Prayer is not
monologue. It may be audible, or it may be the unspoken desire of the
soul. In either case, ideal prayer is communion. Some pray at
length, informing God of things of which he is already aware. They call
His attention to many matters that need correction. They seem to believe
that God is in danger of forgetting certain things that need to be done, and
their prayers take the form of reminding God of what He should do. Having
called God's attention to the need of the world as they see it, they feel they have
done their duty. They have "said their prayers" and
informed God of their own needs and those of others, and with an "Amen"
their "conversation" stops. It has been a monologue
entirely. They hope that God will use judiciously the information which
they have conveyed to Him, and that He will do something about the matters
concerning which they have prayed.
Many consider prayer
a one-way communication, man speaking to God. Yet this is not the highest
form of prayer; for as stated above, ideal prayer is communion. In true
prayer God speaks to the soul as well as man to God. True friendship will
not last long where one does all the speaking. In our prayers we too
often do all the talking and expect God to do all the listening. And yet,
may it not be possible that God would like to communicate with us as well as we
with Him? This he often does by bringing certain scriptures to our
remembrance. Is it too much to believe that after we have offered an
earnest prayer which we believe God in heaven has heard, He might wish to say a
word to us? Is it possible that after we have said "Amen,"
God is just ready to communicate with us, but we get up from our knees and do
not give God a chance to speak? We hang up the receiver, as it
were. We "ring off." Can it be conceived that the
true Christian is forever speaking to God and God has no message for him? It
must be painful to God to be shut out just at the moment when He is ready to
communicate with us. It would seem that after this has happened several
times, God can come to no other conclusion than that we are not very anxious to
have communion with Him. We merely "say" our prayers,
and when we are done, we walk away. Such prayer surely cannot be all that
God means by "communion."
Let us repeat,
prayer is communion. It is more than conversation; it is intimate
fellowship. It is an exchange of views and ideas. It presupposes
sympathetic understanding and confidence. It need not always be
accompanied by words. Silence may be more eloquent than torrents of oratory.
It is rather a kind of friendship grounded in quiet confidence and assurance,
unaccompanied by spectacular demonstrations or outbursts.
Meditation is a
vital ingredient of prayer. It may almost be said to be its better
part. And yet it is mostly neglected. We appear before God, present
our petition, and depart. Next time, we do the same. We keep God
informed in regard to our status, tell Him of some
things that need attention, and having thus delivered our souls, we close the
interview. This is repeated day after day, but it cannot be said to be a
very satisfactory experience. Is there nothing better? There must
be.
The psalms,
especially those of David, sound the depths of Christian feeling. David
passed through some soul-harrowing experiences. Once he was fleeing from
Saul into the wilderness. There he penned the sixty-third psalm. It
is the cry of a soul longing for God, for a deeper knowledge of and
acquaintance with God, especially in prayer. David was evidently not
satisfied with his prayer experience. God seemed far away. He did
not answer. David experienced the feeling of seeming to address nobody,
in an empty room. Yet he longed for God. His soul thirsted for the living
God. Was there no way in which he could get into real communion with Him?
Then David found the
way. He found satisfaction. He learned the real meaning and method
of prayer. Of this he speaks in Psalms 63:5,6, "My soul shall be
satisfied as with marrow and fatness; and my mouth shall praise thee with
joyful lips: when I remember Thee upon my bed, and
meditate on Thee in the night watches." Note the wording: "My
soul shall be satisfied...when I remember Thee upon my bed, and meditate."
David had prayed before. Now to prayer he adds meditation, and says that when
he does this his "soul shall be satisfied." To him it is
as "marrow and fatness," and he praises God "with
joyful lips." At last his soul is satisfied.
This record is of
great value. Many souls, like David, cry out for the living God. They are
not satisfied. They believe that there must be something better than they
are experiencing. They pray and pray and pray, and yet God seems far
off. He does not reveal himself. Once in a while they have a
fleeting glimpse of Him, and then He is gone. Is there anything better in
store or is this all that Christianity and prayer hold for them? There must be
something better. And David found it. "My soul shall be
satisfied." How wonderful to have the soul hunger
satisfied! And this possibility may become a reality! David points
the way when he says that it may be obtained through remembering God and
through meditation. Most Christians remember God. They pray.
In fact it may be said, and rightly, that no one can be a child of God and not
pray. But not many are practiced in the art of meditation. They
pray, but do not meditate. Yet one is as important as the other. It
was when David added meditation to prayer that he at last could say that his
soul was satisfied. It may be that we shall have the same experience.
Few Christians
meditate. They are too busy. Their work makes too many demands upon
them. They rush from one thing to another and have little time to counsel
with their own souls or with God. There is so much to be done. Unless
they strain every nerve and are busy every moment, they are certain souls will
be lost. They have no time to sit at the feet of the Master while the
world is perishing. They must be up and doing. Activity is their
watchword. Withal they are honest and conscientious.
Yet how much is lost
to themselves and to the world because of lack of meditation! No soul can
rush into the presence of God and out again and expect to enjoy communion with
Him. The peace that passes understanding does not dwell in a restless
heart. "Take time to be holy," is more than a mere
sentiment. It takes time to commune with God, time to be holy. "Stand
in awe, and sin not: commune with your own heart upon your bed, and be still.
Selah!" Ps.4:4. The last
statement needs special emphasis. "Be still." We
are too restless. We need to learn quietness with God. We need to be
still.
"My soul, wait
thou in silence for God only." Ps.62:5, A.R.V. Let these words sink deep into each
consciousness. "My soul." This is addressed to
every Christian. This is a command and also a promise. Wait in
silence. Wait in silence for God. Wait thou in silence for
God. Wait thou in silence for God only. And the one who waits in
silence for God only, at His invitation, will not be disappointed. He
will be satisfied.
What a wonderful
invitation this statement is! You have prayed, you have poured out your soul to
Him who alone understands. Do not say "Amen" and walk
off. Give God an opportunity. Wait for him. Wait in silence. Wait
for Him only. And in the silence of the soul God may speak. He has
invited you to wait. Let your whole soul be intent upon Him. Wait
for him only. It may be that God through the still small voice will make
Himself known. Wait in silence upon God.
To some Christians
this is no new doctrine. They know what it is to commune with God.
They have had precious seasons alone with Him. They have learned to wait
in silence. And precious have been the revelations which have come to
them.
To others, however,
this may be a new experience. They have learned to pray, but they have
not learned to wait in silence upon God. Meditation as a part of prayer
has not been important to them. They have conceived of prayer as a certain form
of words reverently addressed to the Father in heaven. With their "Amen"
the communion is at an end. And so indeed it may be, though God does not
intend it thus. Amen may mean the end of man's speaking, but it should
not be the end of the interview. God invites us to wait in silence.
He may wish to speak, or He may not. In any event, we are to wait.
And as we wait, God may see fit at once to bring conviction to our minds.
Many are inclined to
speak too much. We have all had experience with persons who come
ostensibly to seek counsel, but who in reality come only to present their own
views. They seem anxious for the interview, yet hardly an opportunity is
afforded for any counsel, for they occupy the time themselves and seem satisfied
when they have presented their story. When some measure of agreement with
their view is elicited, they are content. The impression is distinct that
they did not come for counsel, but to impart information.
So, too often, with
prayer. The most important part is not our speaking to God, but God's
speaking to us. True, God loves to have us pray. Our prayers are music to
Him. We cannot tire Him. And yet, would it not be well to give God
an opportunity to communicate with us? Would it not be well for us to
have a listening attitude? Would it not be well for us to do exactly what
we are counseled to do, wait in silence for God only? Surely God will not
let us wait in vain. Who has not felt the tremendous power of the few
moments of silence after the benediction? Who has not felt the presence
of God in the stillness of the sanctuary? It would be well for us to
explore the power of the realm of silence. God is there.
There is always
danger of going to extremes. There are those who reject or think lightly
of the instruction given in the Bible and depend almost wholly on
impressions. Such are in great danger. We believe that God will
lead those who are willing to be led, but we believe also that such leading
will always be in harmony with God's revealed will, and will not in any way
contradict the written word. Wonderful as is the privilege of communing
with God, and wonderful as is the privilege of meditation, there is danger of
their misuse. Especially should the younger Christians be on their
guard. Only long experience in the things of God, backed by a life of
obedience to God's will, enables one to judge the processes of the mind.
Satan is ever near to suggest his own thoughts, and spiritual discernment is
needed to know the voice speaking. This, however, should not cause even
young Christians to omit meditation. Far from it. God is ever near,
to help and guide, and we may believe that the quiet hour spent with God will
yield large results for the kingdom. We are only issuing a warning to
such as would be led by a voice speaking to the soul and neglect the voice
speaking through the Word.
In the sanctuary of
old, sacrifice and prayer were combined. Sacrifice stood for sorrow for
sin, repentance, confession, restitution. When the lamb was placed on the
altar, the repentant sinner in type laid himself and his all on the
altar. It signified his acceptance of the justice of the law that
demanded a life, it signified his consecration to God. Without this
attitude, the sacrifice of a lamb was only a mockery. So our prayers may
be only a mockery unless we from a sincere heart abstain from sin and dedicate
ourselves entirely to God. Prayer must have sincerity as a foundation and
background. It must be grounded in repentance and godly sorrow for sin.
It must be evidenced by confession and restitution. A prayer thus
conditioned will not remain unanswered. God is true to His word.
THE LAW
Chapter Sixteen
ALL THE SERVICES OF THE SANCTUARY were performed with reference to the law
of God kept in the ark in the inmost apartment of the tabernacle. It was
when this law was broken, that sacrifices were to be brought. "If
a soul shall sin through ignorance against any of the commandments of the Lord
concerning things which ought not to be done, and
shall do against any of them: if the priest that is anointed do sin according
to the sin of the people; then let him bring for his sin, which he hath sinned,
a young bullock without blemish unto the Lord for a sin offering." Lev.4:2,3.
It was the
transgression of "the commandments of the Lord" that
necessitated the sacrificial system. It was sin against God's law that
set in motion the entire ritual of the temple. Sin was the background of
the morning and evening sacrifice, the services of the Day of Atonement, the
offering of incense, and the individual sacrifices for personal sins. And
sin is the transgression of the law.
John the beloved had
a vision of the temple of God in heaven. In that temple he saw the law of God, "the
ark of His testament." Rev.11:19. The law is central even in heaven. So much is this so, that
the temple is called "the temple of the tabernacle of the
testimony," not the temple of incense, or of blood, or even of the
ark. It is "the temple of the tabernacle of the testimony,"
the temple of the law of God. Rev.15:5.
The most sacred city
in Old Testament times was the city in which God had chosen to make His
abode. The most sacred place in that city was the temple. The most
sacred place in the temple was the place called the most holy. The most
sacred object in the most holy was the ark within which were the tables of
stone upon which God had written with His own finger the ten commandments, the
law of life, the oracles of God. This law was the center around which the
whole service revolved, the ground and reason of every ritual. Without
the law, the temple service would be meaningless.
Law is an expression
of character, a revelation of mind. For this reason, the law of God is
important. It is a part of God, as it were. It reveals Him.
It is a transcript of His character, a finite expression of the infinite.
In it we are given a glimpse of the very mind of God; a view of that which is
the foundation of His government. As God is perfect, so His law is perfect.
As God is eternal, so the principles of the law are eternal. As God is
unchangeable, so the law is unchangeable. This must of necessity be
so. The law, being a transcript of the character of God, cannot be
changed unless a corresponding change takes place in God. But God does
not change. "I am the Lord, I change not." Mal.3:6. With God there "is no
variableness, neither shadow of turning." James 1:17. He is "the same yesterday, and
today, and forever." Heb.13:8.
The law of God as
contained in the ten commandments has always been a fruitful field of study for
God's children. Numerous are the references in the Bible to the delight
which the saints of God have found in looking into the perfect law of
liberty. Far from its being a task, they have regarded it a pleasure to
contemplate the deep things of God. Hear the psalmist: "I love
Thy commandments above gold; yea, above fine gold." "Thy
testimonies are wonderful." "Thou through Thy
commandments hast made me wiser than mine enemies: for they are ever with
me. I have more understanding than all my teachers: for Thy testimonies
are my meditation." "I have seen an end of all
perfection: but Thy commandment is exceeding broad." Ps.119:127,129,98,99,96.
The ten commandments
were first proclaimed by God at Sinai, and then written by Him on two tables of
stone. Ex.20; 24:12; 31:18.
These tables were placed in the ark in the most holy place of the sanctuary,
directly under the mercy seat and covered by it. Ex.25:16, 21. The writing contained on them, as
recorded in the King James Version of the English Bible, is as follows:
"I am the Lord
thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of
bondage.
1. "Thou
shalt have no other gods before Me.
2. "Thou
shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is
in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under
the earth: thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the
Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the
children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me; and showing
mercy unto thousands of them that love Me, and keep My commandments.
3. "Thou
shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold
him guiltless that taketh His name in vain.
4. "Remember
the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy
work: but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt
not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy
maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: for in
six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and
rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and
hallowed it.
5. "Honor
thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the
Lord thy God giveth thee.
6. "Thou
shalt not kill.
7. "Thou
shalt not commit adultery.
8. "Thou
shalt not steal.
9. "Thou
shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
10. "Thou
shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife,
nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything
that is thy neighbor's." Ex.20:2-17.
The ten commandments
are not arbitrary decrees imposed upon unwilling subjects. They are
rather the law of life without which national existence, personal security,
human liberty, or even civilization is possible. This will become more
patent as we proceed.
The commandments are
divided into two sections, the one section -- the first four commandments --
defining man's duty to God, and the other section -- the last six commandments
-- defining man's duty to his fellow men. Christ recognized this division
when He stated that the two great principles of the law are love to God and
love to man. "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy
heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first
and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love
thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and
the prophets." Matt.22:37-40.
The occasion for the
proclamation by God of His law at Sinai, was His entering into covenant
relation with Israel. God had selected Israel to be His people. He
had brought them out of Egypt and was about to bring them into the Promised
Land. He had promised to bless them and to make of them a holy nation and
a royal priesthood. These promises, however, were subject to their
acceptance and cooperation. God had promised to do much for them.
Would they on their part love and obey God? Would they faithfully observe
the provisions of the covenant? They had been acquainted in a general way
with the law of God. But now God proclaims it to them from heaven, so
there can be no doubt as to what is expected of them. Holiness must not be left
to private interpretation. God gives a standard of righteousness. That
standard is perfect. "The law is holy, and just, and good."
It is an expression of God's will concerning man. It is the perfect rule and
contains the whole duty of man.
It is a matter of
some perplexity to find Christians opposed to the law of God. What
possible objection can they have to a law that enjoins love to God and man,
that frowns on evil and encourages good? What possible objection can they have
to a law the author of which is Jehovah, the end of which is holiness, and
which is enshrined in the sanctuary of God? Sinners might be expected to
oppose it, for it exposes and condemns sin. But Christians are on another
level. With the psalmist, they cry out: "O how love I Thy law! it
is my meditation all the day." Ps.119:97
As law in general is
the foundation of government, so the law of God is the foundation of God's
government. Ten short, clear-cut statements proclaim the entire duty of
man. As a constitution, it is complete, concise, perfect. Nothing
can be added to it or taken from it. Law is emblematic of security,
stability, faithfulness, uniformity, equality. Absence of law means chaos
with its attendant evils. The world is built on law, the universe is
obedient to it. Infraction of universal law would mean annihilation of
the creation of God. Every part is related to every other part, and what
happens in one place reverberates to the ends of the universe. This makes
universal law necessary. One law must control wherever creation
exists. Two conflicting laws would bring disaster.
The one fundamental
moral law of the universe is the law of God, embodied from eternity in the two
great principles of love to God and love to man. These principles were
amplified and applied to humanity, and the ten commandments were proclaimed,
for man's guidance, at Mt. Sinai. They constitute the basic law of life
and existence. As has been stated before, they are not arbitrary requirements
imposed for the sake of authority. They are such as God in His wise
foresight saw were necessary if men were to live together, and human society
become possible. And men's experiences have confirmed God's wisdom.
The world has demonstrated that obedience to God's law is necessary to
existence, to security, to life.
The great World War
was a demonstration of this fact. Men laughed at the ten
commandments. They made light of them. They began to kill and
destroy one another. Each nation felt that should it win the war, great
benefit would accrue not only to itself, but incidentally to the world.
But the world has been disillusioned. It has learned that there is no
profit in hatred, --or in killing. The World War was a forceful
illustration of the folly of rejecting the commandments of God. Not only
were millions maimed and killed, immense debts piled up, and general disaster
imminent, but many were definitely convinced that a continuation of war would
mean the end of civilization and national life. Men were appalled at the
magnitude of the calamity facing them. They began to believe that the
commandment, "Thou shalt not kill," was not an arbitrary
decree, but one of the laws of life. Keep the commandments and live;
reject them and die -- that was the lesson.
The same lesson is
being taught nations today. Crime is rampant, aggressive, defiant. There
have always been wicked men, but never on such a scale as today. Crime is
now organized, in some cases carrying on what amounts to real war against
society. In some cases, criminals are better armed and organized than the
forces of law and order. It is only of late that governments have really
awakened to the fact that they are face to face with disintegrating agencies
that are bent on overthrowing civilization. They are now making every
effort to stamp out the evil, but find it no easy task. It is costly; it
is exhausting; it is at times discouraging; but it must be carried to a successful
issue, or disaster will result. The governments' attempt to curtail
graft, to eradicate vice, to stop racketeering, to uphold the sacredness of
family relations, to compel honesty in public relations, and to protect
property, is an admission on their part that God is right, that men ought not
to lie, steal, or commit adultery; that the transgression of these commandments
leads to disaster and disruption, and that the government is justified in
taking any measures necessary to better conditions.
The whole movement
to stamp out crime is a mighty testimony to the integrity and enduring value of
the commandments of God. Men and governments are learning that crime does
not pay; that crime is costly; that crime ruins and destroys. This is the
lesson God wants them to learn. And they are finding out in their own way
the value of obedience to law. Never has the world had such an object
lesson in the cost of crime, the cost of transgression. The world itself
both furnishes the material for the demonstration and pays the cost of
it. This makes the lesson that much more effective.
Law is an expression
of the will, nature, and character of the governing power. Any law that
is not such an expression soon ceases to function and becomes obsolete.
Human law is ordinarily the result of experience, of thought-out purpose based
on the discovery of what is and should be, and an attempt to formulate into
concise statements, rules for proper and appropriate conduct and
procedure. It must have will as a basic factor, and be an expression of
that will, and also of the nature and character of the lawgiver. Law
therefore argues personality, and defines and reveals that personality.
The expression "law
of nature," as ordinarily employed, is misleading, and should be used
only in an accommodated sense. Properly speaking, there is no law of
nature as such, for nature has no will or thought of its own, and no way of
expressing such will or thought. What is generally meant by "law
of nature" is the orderly process in which nature acts, a definite
mode of sequence that is generally predictable. The Christian believes
the laws of nature to be the laws of God, an expression of personal will, and
does not endow nature with attributes belonging only to personality, to God.
A.H. Strong uses an
illustration which points an important lesson. As the Christian sees a
shaft turning a large and complicated piece of machinery, and in his attempts
to find out what makes the shaft revolve, comes to a brick wall from which it
protrudes and beyond which he cannot see and cannot go, he does not arrive at
the conclusion that the shaft turns itself. He cannot see, he cannot
prove, the existence of the engine beyond the brick wall that gives the shaft
its power. But he knows it is there. Good sense tells him
this. The mere scientist sees the shaft, and marvels at its inherent
power. The Christian sees the shaft also. But he sees beyond
it. He sees the invisible, and he knows that there is a hidden power
behind the shaft. To him it is simple, clear, nothing mysterious.
He only wonders that all cannot see what seems to him so evident. So
likewise through nature he sees nature's God; and the laws of nature are to him
merely the laws of God.
The law of God is a
transcript of the divine nature, and as such is not "made" as
human laws are made, any more than God is "made." The
law cannot be said to have had a beginning any more than God had a
beginning. Being a revelation of what He is its existence is coeval with
God's. It can be changed only as God changes. It is not temporary,
as God is not temporary. It is not an expression of arbitrary will, but a
revelation of being. It is not local or confined to specific situations
only, as God is not local. It is incapable of modification, representing
as it does the unchangeable nature of God. It is immutable, holy, and
good, because God is immutable, holy, and good. It is spiritual; it is
just; it is universal. All this the law is and must be, being a
transcript of the essential nature of God.
Besides the written
moral law of God, there is an elemental law, imprinted in the very fibers of
every moral creature, unwritten but authoritative. It existed before
Sinai, and is also an expression and reflection of the moral nature of God,
though it is not as clear as the written law. The heathen who "have
not the law [in written form], do by nature the things contained in the law,
these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves; which show the work of
the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and
their thoughts the meanwhile accusing or else excusing one another." Rom.2:14,15.
This unwritten law
is so authoritative that God is justified in using it in the judgment. "For
as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many
as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law." Verse 12. The heathen "do by nature the
things contained in the law," that is, they have an inherent sense of
right and wrong, and by this they are judged. "These, having not
the law, are a law unto themselves." According to the light they
have, or might have had, they are judged.
This elemental law,
though unwritten, has all the characteristics of the written law of God, and,
in its field, is of equal authority. No man can violate natural law and
expect to escape the consequences. The laws of nature are inviolable, and
are administered without respect of persons. Whoever transgresses, be he
prince or pauper, pays the penalty. A king who unknowingly or deliberately
steps off into space when climbing a steep mountain incline, is crushed against
the rocks below as surely as his lowliest subject. Men have learned the
certainty of natural law and are trusting to its unfailing uniformity.
They are convinced that the laws of physics, of mathematics, of stress, do not
change overnight. So they plan, build, live, and work, depending on the
surety of law. And God does not fail them. Men can depend on God
and on His law in nature.
The unwritten moral
law is just as sure. The conscience bears witness to a power higher than
man's, a compelling power, an almost irresistible power. True, the moral
law moving in higher realm than the physical may not be capable of the
immediate demonstration, and the effects of transgression may not be as
apparent as in the violation of physical law. But they are nevertheless
as sure.
Not all violation of
physical law is punished immediately. A man touches a highly charged live
wire and is struck dead immediately. Another violates the law of his
being in living and eating and does not note any immediate effect. Years
after, the results become apparent. But though the results may be
delayed, they are sure and inevitable. So with
moral law. The results of transgressions may be delayed. But they
are surely coming. They may not even be apparent in this life, but may be
reserved for the judgment to come. But in any case, the results are sure
and unavoidable -- but for the grace of God.
There is a reason
for God's mode of action. If punishment were always meted out
immediately, character building would be very much hindered if not made
impossible. Every physical sin, however small, has in it the seed of
death. If that death came immediately, there would of course be no opportunity
for the person concerned to learn any lesson from the experience. Also,
others, knowing that the result of disobedience was immediate death, would be
deterred from transgression not from principle but from fear. To give men
a chance to repent of physical sins and also to give them opportunity to do so
uninfluenced by fear of immediate death, God must delay the consequences of
transgression for a time. This He does, and the results justify the
procedure.
This principle is
even more applicable to the moral law. God must not execute punishment
for the transgression of moral law immediately, lest He vitiate His plan and
make salvation hard, if not impossible. Though at times it is true that "because
sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of
the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil," yet God must not
immediately execute judgment lest He do more harm than good. God knows
what He is doing. He has set for Himself the task of saving men, and He
goes about it in the best way possible.
The written law of
God as contained in the ten commandments summarizes man's whole duty to God and
to man. The God that made the law of nature is the same God who made the
ten commandments. Both laws are given by God, and though they move in different
realms, they are equally binding and cannot be transgressed with
impunity. The law of God as written on two tables of stone, as well as in
the heart of the believer, is in harmony with the general and unwritten law of
God.
But nature nowhere
indicates a definite day of rest. That appears in the written law of
God. The heathen have perceptions of right and wrong, and their
consciences accuse or excuse them. This does not seem to be the case,
however, with the seventh-day Sabbath. There is nothing in nature to lead
the mind to the observance of one day in seven, much less, a definite seventh
day. This may require some study.
The Sabbath was
instituted at creation. It was then "made for man." Mark 2:27. By His own example of resting, God
sanctified the day and blessed it. Out of all the days of the week He
chose one and set it apart for holy use. Henceforth it was blessed among
days, sanctified by God Himself.
The choice of the particular day of the week was a distinct act of God
which can be known only by revelation. Nature gives no clue whatever as
to which day is the Sabbath, or indeed, to any Sabbath at all. The
commandment to keep holy the seventh day is a pronouncement by the sovereign
God, setting apart a particular day as holy time. While it seems fitting
that the last day of creation week should be chosen as the day of rest, it is
conceivable that Wednesday or any other day might serve the purpose as well,
had the Creator so ordained. Thus choice of the seventh day rests not
upon any fact in nature, but upon a positive command of God, unaccompanied by
any sustaining elemental or natural law. It rests entirely upon a "Thus
saith the Lord."
We believe there is
a reason for this. We shall proceed with this study.
THE SABBATH
Chapter Seventeen
"REMEMBER THE
SABBATH DAY, TO KEEP IT HOLY. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy
work: but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt
not do any work, thou, nor they son, nor they daughter, thy manservant, nor
they maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them
is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and
hallowed it." Ex.20:8-11.
If a person who had
not previously known of the ten commandments should suddenly come face to face
with them, he would at once be struck with their reasonableness and good
sense. As he read the commandment, "Thou shalt not steal,"
he would agree that it is a good commandment. So with the commandments, "Thou
shalt not kill," and, "Thou shalt not commit adultery."
He would doubtless observe that most nations had similar laws and had found
them necessary and good. He would be unable to find any fault with the
law of God.
One thing, however,
might be puzzling to him. Why should the seventh day be considered
holy? He would be able to see reason for the other commandments, but the
Sabbath commandment would seem arbitrary. From a health viewpoint every
fifth or sixth day, or eighth or tenth day, would serve as well. And
anyway, why select the seventh day of the week rather than just one seventh
part of the time? The other commandments are reasonable, he would think,
but the Sabbath commandment is of a different nature. It is not grounded
in nature or human relations, but is an arbitrary decree without sufficient
reason for obedience or enforcement.
The writer once had
a conversation with a person in which the arguments here set forth were
advanced. The person in question was well educated. The
conversation turned upon the law of God, especially the Sabbath
commandment. His argument ran somewhat as follows:
"I appreciate
the contribution your denomination is making toward law and order. In an
age such as this, in which crime and lawlessness prevail, we must depend on the
churches to stand stiffly for righteousness. I am sorry to note that some
of the churches are not doing this. They are making light of the law of
God, and this cannot but react in civil affairs. If God's law can be
ignored with impunity, it is easy to take a like attitude toward civil
law. I am glad, therefore, that you are preaching the law as well as the
gospel. Both are needed.
"There is one
thing, however, in which I believe you are mistaken. You are keeping the
seventh day, and you believe that God requires you to do this. Though I
honor your belief and think you are honest, I also think you are
mistaken. I have given some study to the question, and I believe that
God's will and intent could be served just as well by your keeping the first
day of the week as by your keeping the last; and it would be a great deal
easier for you, and your influence would be enhanced. While I personally
believe that it is immaterial whether I keep one day or another, or no day at
all, I honor those who do. But I do think you are mistaken in believing
that you must keep the seventh day. God does not require it of you.
The most He could expect would be for you to keep one day in seven.
"The Sabbath
commandment is of a different nature from the other commandments. The
fourth commandment stands alone in not being grounded in the nature of man as
the other commandments are. If a group of men who had never heard of the
ten commandments were to live together, they would soon evolve a series of laws
for their own guidance. Heathen nations and savage tribes have rules
against stealing, killing, and adultery. I believe that such primitive
peoples would after a while construct a code of laws in conformity with the ten
commandments; but I do not see how they could ever evolve a Sabbath law.
There is nothing in nature that could guide them in such an undertaking.
This I believe proves my contention that the Sabbath law is not founded on
natural law, is not grounded in man's nature as are the other commandments, and
that men sustain to that commandment a different relation from what they do to
the others. I consider the other commandments binding, but not the
Sabbath commandment."
To this, answer was
given along the following line:
"Without
admitting the truth of all your contentions, let us grant that the Sabbath
commandment is on a different basis from that of the rest of the commandments,
and that man unaided by revelation could never arrive at a belief in a
seventh-day Sabbath.
"That the
Sabbath commandment occupies a unique place in the law of God is, I believe,
conceded by most students. It is the one commandment that deals with
time. It has the distinction of declaring certain things right if done at
a stated time, and the same things wrong if done at another time. It
creates wrong and right by definition without any discernible reason grounded
in nature. In that it is different from the other commandments.
"It was this
commandment which God selected in olden times to be the test commandment.
Before the law was publicly proclaimed at Sinai, 'Israel murmured against Moses
and Aaron in the wilderness: and the children of Israel said unto them, Would
to God we had died by the hand of the Lord in the land of Egypt, when we sat by
the fleshpots, and when we did eat bread to the full; for ye have brought us
forth into the wilderness, to kill this whole assembly with hunger.' Ex.16:2,3. The
situation was critical. Something had to be done. 'Then said the
Lord unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people
shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them,
whether they will walk in My law, or no.' Verse 4.
"The gathering
and the preparation of the bread which the Lord sent from heaven constituted
the test for Israel to 'prove them, whether they will walk in My law or
no.' Every day they were to gather enough for the day's need, but on the
sixth day they were to gather twice as much, so as to
have enough to last them over the Sabbath. While the manna ordinarily
would not keep fresh more than one day, on the sixth day God miraculously
preserved the manna from corruption. So 'On the sixth day they gather
twice as much bread.' Verse 22. 'And he said unto them, This is that which the Lord hath said,
Tomorrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord: bake that which ye will
bake today and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up
for you to be kept until the morning. And they laid it up till the
morning, as Moses bade: and it did not stink, neither was there any worm
therein. And Moses said, Eat that today; for today is a Sabbath unto the Lord:
today ye shall not find it in the field. Six days ye shall gather it; but
on the seventh day, which is the Sabbath, in it there shall be none.' Ex.16:23-26.
"Some of the
people were not satisfied, however. They went out 'on the seventh day for
to gather, and they found none. And the Lord said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep My commandments, and My
laws? See, for that the Lord hath given you the Sabbath, therefore He
giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide ye every man in his
place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day. So the people rested on the seventh day.' Verses 27-30.
"Of all the
commandments God chose the fourth as the test commandment. When He wanted
'to prove them, whether they will walk in My law or no,' He told them to gather
manna each day sufficient for their need, twice as much on the sixth day, and
none on the seventh. That was the test. When they disobeyed, it was
not merely the Sabbath they broke; it was the whole law. 'How long refuse
ye to keep My commandments and My laws?' God said. Not, 'Why do ye
not keep the Sabbath?' The question was larger than that. It
involved the whole law. The keeping of the Sabbath was the test. If
they kept that, they were obedient. If they broke it, they broke the
whole law.
"It is to this
and to later experiences that Ezekiel has reference when he quotes God as
saying in the wilderness: 'I gave them My Sabbaths, to be a sign between Me and
them, that they might know that I am the Lord that sanctify them.' Eze.20:12. The statement is here made that God's
Sabbaths are a sign of sanctification. In verse twenty the Lord's
Sabbaths are called 'a sign between Me and you, that ye may know that I am the
Lord your God.' In the first verse quoted the Sabbaths are called a sign
of sanctification, in the second a sign 'that I am the Lord thy God.' In
both they are called signs.
"It is
interesting to note the connection in which these statements are made.
The elders of Israel had come to inquire of the Lord, but the Lord declared
emphatically that He would not be inquired of by them. Eze.20:3. He had spoken to them so many times,
and they had not hearkened. Why should He communicate with them, when they
refused to do what He commanded them? They were like their fathers, God
said. The fathers had not been obedient, neither did these show any
inclination to hearken. When Ezekiel feels inclined to plead for them,
the Lord commands him to tell them plainly wherein they have failed.
'Cause them to know the abominations of their fathers,' the Lord says. Verse
4. This Ezekiel does by
recounting to them the difficulty the Lord had in bringing Isreal
out of Egypt into the Promised Land, and in getting them to keep His
commandments, especially the fourth.
"While they
were still in Egypt, God had commanded them to cast aside all idols. This they
had not done. Nevertheless, God brought them out of Egypt into the wilderness
and proclaimed to them His law. In that law He points out the Sabbath,
saying that it is His sign of sanctification and that He wants them to keep it
holy. 'But the house of Israel rebelled;... My
Sabbaths they greatly polluted: then I said, I will pour out My fury upon them
in the wilderness, to consume them.' Verse 13. God, however, decides not to consume them. On the other
hand, He feels that He cannot 'bring them into the land which I had given them,...because they...polluted My Sabbaths.' Verses 15,16.
"God pleads
with them: 'Walk ye not in the statutes of your fathers, neither observe their
judgments, nor defile yourselves with their idols: I am the Lord your God; walk
in My statutes, and keep My judgments, and do them. And hallow My Sabbaths; and
they shall be a sign between Me and you, that ye may know that I am the Lord
your God.' But 'the children rebelled;...they
polluted My Sabbaths: then I said, I will pour out My fury upon them, to
accomplish My anger against them in the wilderness.' Verse 21. God decides that He will 'scatter them
among the heathen, and disperse them through the
countries; because they had not executed My judgments, but had despised My
statutes, and had polluted My Sabbaths, and their eyes were after their
fathers' idols.' Verses
23,24.
"Twice the
statement is made that the children of Israel 'rebelled;...they
polluted My Sabbaths.' God at last decides to 'purge out from among you
the rebels, and them that transgress against Me,' and to see to it that 'they
shall not enter into the land of Israel.' Verse 38. The connection between 'rebels' and those that pollute the Sabbath
seems quite intimate.
"No one can
reverently read this chapter without coming to the conclusion that God makes
much of the Sabbath, that it is a test, a sign, that it is selected above the
other commandments as a proof of obedience. 'I will prove them,' God
says, 'whether they will walk in My law or no.' The keeping of the Sabbath
is the proof. It is the sign of sanctification. It is the sign that
'I am the Lord your God.'
"Just why did
God select the Sabbath commandment as a test rather than one of the other
commandments? Admitting the contention that the Sabbath rests upon a 'Thus
saith the Lord' only, special prominence and significance is thereby given to
it. The other commandments are founded not only on a decree of God, but
also in the nature of man, a part of the elemental or natural law. One
commandment is singled out from the rest, to stand as a test, a sign, that if a
person obeys that, he is in harmony with the whole law.
"It is as if
God should reason thus concerning the other nine commandments: I have given
them My law. I have written it upon their hearts; it is traced in every
fiber of their being. They know instinctively what is right and what is
not. Their own conscience witnesses to the truthfulness of My law.
There is one thing needful, however. The law is so plain, it is so
evident to all that these basic commandments are necessary to existence, to
peace and life, that men might fail to accept them as of divine origin.
Some will contend that the nine commandments are so vital and evident that
unaided by any divine direction, the people would of themselves be able to make
a law comparable to Mine. They will boast that through the passing of the
ages men have through experience arrived at the conclusion that it is not good
to steal or lie or kill, and have evolved appropriate laws concerning such matters,
and that these laws are not of divine origin, but are the result of human
experiment and are definitely ingrained in the race. They will point with
assurance to tribes and races who for centuries have been out of touch with
civilization and yet have rules covering many points in the law. They
will claim that this is proof that man unaided by any divine power can
duplicate My law. They will assert that the law is not of divine origin,
that men are simply following a law which their own experience teaches them is
for the good of mankind.
"God continues:
I will make one provision in My law that is not based on elemental or natural
law; that does not have any correspondence in nature; that will be a definite
command, and for which they will be unable to find any reason aside from My
command. For the other commandments man can see a reason. They
appeal to his good sense. But for this commandment there will be no other
reason than My word. If they obey it, they obey Me. If they reject it they reject Me. I will make that commandment a
test, a sign. I will make it a test of whether they will keep My law, or
no. I will make it a sign that I am the Lord.
"I will make
the Sabbath and ask them to observe it. There is nothing in all the world
to indicate a sabbath of rest. If they keep the Sabbath commandment, it
will be because I command it. I will make it a test and tell them
so. This will prove whether they will walk in My law or no. The
Sabbath will be My sign, My test of obedience. The seventh day, not one
day in seven. Whoever keeps it, obeys Me. Whoever rejects it, rejects not
only the Sabbath, but the whole law. More than that, when they reject the
seventh day, they reject Me. The keeping of the seventh-day Sabbath is a
sign that they accept Me as their God.
"In course of
time there will arise men who will claim to be religious, but who in reality
are leaning to their own understanding. Many of them will reject the
story and the God of creation, substituting their own theories of how things
came to be. While they were not present at creation when I spoke things
into existence, they will pronounce learnedly of how it was done, rejecting My
testimony as to the event. Some of them will definitely reject Me. Others
will claim to believe in Me, and yet when it comes to a conflict between My
word and their findings, they will reject My word and accept their own
theories. Rejecting the story of creation, they will naturally reject the
memorial of creation, the Sabbath. They will not accept that which they
cannot reason out. Their own mind is their final source of
authority. I will give them a test which will show whether they believe
in Me or not. I will prove them, whether they will really walk in My law
or no. If they accept My sign, My test, My
Sabbath, they acknowledge in that acceptance a mind higher than their
own. If they reject My Sabbath, they reject Me, My word, My law. I
will make the Sabbath the test.
"Men will
understand the challenge. They will not be able to evade the issue.
They will clearly see that in the acceptance of the Sabbath they must and do
accept My word by faith, rather than by their own reasoning. The keeping
of the Sabbath rests upon faith only. Men cannot reason it out upon the
basis of human experience or research. If they accept the Sabbath at all,
they accept it because of their faith in Me. "The evil one, My adversary, will make every effort to destroy the faith of
My people. He will attempt to counterfeit My work. He will advocate
a spurious day of rest, and make it more convenient and popular than the day I
chose at creation. And he will succeed with a large
number of people who will accept him in preference to Me. He will
challenge My day of rest and rally the people under his banner. The
people will have a clear-cut issue before them. It will be a question of
My Sabbath and My word on the one hand, and the spurious Sabbath of My
adversary on the other hand. I have My sign. He has his. It
will be for each one to choose under which banner he will stand.
"Knowing the
end from the beginning, I have deliberately chosen the Sabbath as the test, to
prove whether men will walk in My law, or no. This is why I have placed
it in the bosom of the law. This also explains why I have chosen not to
connect it with natural law. It stands absolutely alone
and rests only upon My word. I have made it the test commandment."
It is not our
contention that God passed through such a process of thought as is here
suggested. He knows all things. For good and sufficient reasons He
gave the Sabbath as a sign, a test. We believe we can see some reasons
for this. It behooves us to place ourselves wholeheartedly on God's side
in this important matter.
The Sabbath
commandment has a vital bearing on the atonement. It was with reference
to the transgression of the law that the blood was sprinkled in the sanctuary
service. It was when one had done "somewhat against any of the
commandments of the Lord" that he needed atonement. Lev.4:27. Does the transgression of the Sabbath
commandment constitute "somewhat" against one of the
commandments? Numbers 15 contains a lesson in point.
The Lord, speaking
to Israel, says: "If ye have erred and not observed all these
commandments which the Lord hath spoken unto Moses,...it
shall be forgiven all the congregation of the children of Israel, and the
stranger that sojourneth among them; seeing all the
people were in ignorance." Num.15:22-26.
Any sin which Israel
or the stranger might do ignorantly should be forgiven. "Ye shall
have one law for him that sinneth through ignorance, both for him that is born
among the children of Israel, and for the stranger that sojourneth
among them." Verse 29.
If a man sinned
willfully, he was treated differently. "The soul that doeth ought
presumptuously, whether he be born in the land, or a stranger, the same reproacheth the Lord; and that soul shall be cut off from
among his people. Because he hath despised the word of the Lord, and hath
broken His commandment, that soul shall utterly be cut off; his iniquity shall
be upon him." Verses 30,31.
An illustration
follows as to what is meant by sinning "presumptuously:" A man
was found gathering sticks on the Sabbath day. The leaders were uncertain what
should be done, and so "they put him in ward, because it was not
declared what should be done to him." Verse 34. The Lord did not long keep them in suspense. "The
Lord said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to
death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.
And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with
stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses." Verses
35,36.
God had proclaimed
to Israel His commandments. He had told them to remember the Sabbath
day. He had announced that it was His test whether they would walk in His
law or no. There was no excuse. When the man went out gathering
sticks on the Sabbath, he was not in ignorance. He was rebellious.
He "despised the word of the Lord." He broke the
commandments. There was but one law for him. He had sinned
presumptuously.
It is one thing for
men on earth lightly to think to change the day of the Sabbath. It is
another thing for them to touch the eternal law of God, which is the foundation
of His throne in heaven above. These commandments constitute the basis
and ground of the atonement. A copy of them was kept in the sacred ark in
the most holy place in the sanctuary on earth. None but the high priest
could ever enter the most holy. The law was the very foundation of God's
throne and government. When on a certain occasion a man touched the ark,
he was immediately smitten. 1Chron.13:9,10. What would have happened should he have put his hand into the ark
and attempted to change God's writing on the tables! Yet men impiously
consider such a possibility! They forget God's holiness and the
sacredness of the law, not to mention the impossibility of changing that which
is engraved in stone, and that by God's own finger!
Is it possible that
the law which is the ground of the atonement and which necessitated the death
of the Lord, has been changed? If the Sabbath commandment has been
changed, have others also been changed? Did Christ die for one thing in
the Old Testament and for another in the New? Did God demand the death
penalty for willful transgression of the Sabbath commandment the day before
Christ died on the cross, and not the day after? Or was there a "neutral"
zone as to the death penalty? There may be differences among Christians
as to many things. Can there be any difference of opinion as to the need
of atonement? Is Christ still our High Priest? If so, for what does
He atone? Is the law still beneath the mercy seat in the ark?
Without the law the
atonement becomes a farce, Christ's incarnation a pious fable, His death a
miscarriage of justice, Gethsemane a tragedy. If the law -- or any of the
commandments -- can be transgressed with impunity; if the law has been
abrogated or its precepts changed; if the law as given by God Himself has
ceased to be the standard in the judgment, then Christ's death becomes
unnecessary, the Father Himself ceases to be the embodiment of justice and
kindness, and Christ cannot escape the charge of being party to a
deception. Let all Christians cry out against such doctrine! If the
law is destroyed, the atonement is not needed, nor is Christ. Let the
facts ever remain clear in all minds: Christ lived, suffered, died, and rose
for us. We had sinned, transgressed the law, and were doomed to
death. Christ saved us, not by doing away with law,--for then He would
not have needed to die,--but by dying for us, thereby forever establishing the
claims of the law. He now ministers His precious blood for us in the
sanctuary above. He is our Advocate, our Surety, our High Priest.
He is the same yesterday, today, and forever. By faith in Him we are
saved.
THE LAST CONFLICT
Chapter Eighteen
IN DANIEL 8:14 OCCURS A STATEMENT which now claims our attention. It
reads: "Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the
sanctuary be cleansed."
Any statement
concerning the sanctuary is important. The text quoted above is
particularly so. It states that at a certain time the sanctuary shall be
cleansed. This is rather unusual, for the earthly sanctuary was cleansed
every year, on the Day of Atonement. Why, then, should a certain time,
twenty-three hundred days, elapse before this particular cleansing should take
place?
The eighth chapter
of Daniel contains an important prophecy. It describes a vision which
Daniel had concerning a ram and a he-goat: "In the third year of the
reign of King Belshazzar a vision appeared unto me, even unto me Daniel, after
that which appeared unto me at the first. And I saw in a vision; and it came
to pass, when I saw, that I was at Shushan in the palace, which is in the
province of Elam; and I saw in a vision, and I was by the river of Ulai. Then I lifted up mine eyes, and saw, and,
behold, there stood before the river a ram which had two horns: and the two
horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up
last.
"And I saw the
ram pushing westward, and northward, and southward; so that no beasts might
stand before him, neither was there any that could deliver out of his hand; but
he did according to his will, and became great. And as I was considering,
behold, a he-goat came from the west on the face of the whole earth, and
touched not the ground; and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes.
And he came to the ram that had two horns, which I had seen standing before the
river, and ran unto him in the fury of his power. And I saw him come
close unto the ram, and he was moved with choler against him, and smote the
ram, and brake his two horns: and there was no power in the ram to stand before
him, but he cast him down to the ground, and stamped upon him: and there was
none that could deliver the ram out of his hand. Therefore the he-goat
waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it
came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven." Dan.8:1-8.
The interpretation
is given in verses 20, 21: "The ram which thou sawest having two horns
are the kings of Media and Persia. And the rough goat is the king of
Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king."
Among commentators
there is unanimity that the "great horn" is Alexander the
Great. While he was yet "strong, the great horn was broken."
Verse
8. In its place came up four
others, denoting the four divisions of the Greek Empire at the death of
Alexander. Verse 22. The
part of the prophecy in which we are especially interested begins with verse
nine. "Out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed
exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant
land. And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down
some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them.
Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily
sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down.
And a host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of
transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practiced, and
prospered. Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto
that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the
daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the
sanctuary and the host to be trodden underfoot? And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the
sanctuary be cleansed."
It is evident that
the prophecy turns upon the "little horn" which waxed "exceeding
great." Alexander is "the great horn." Dan.8:21. The power symbolized by the little
horn began in an inconspicuous way, but became "exceeding great."
It is noteworthy what this horn does. It shall "destroy
wonderfully" the people of God. Verse 24. This is done, not so much by war as "by
peace." Verse 25.
It is wise and crafty, and has a definite "policy."
Verse 25. It is powerful, "but
not by his own power," and shall "prosper, and practice."
Verses 24,12. It is a
proud power, for "he shall magnify himself in his heart," "yea,
he magnified himself even to the prince of the host." Verses
25,11. It is a persecuting power,
for it destroys "the mighty and the holy people," and a whole "host"
is given him "to be trodden underfoot." Verses
24,10,13. It teaches false
doctrines and it "cast down the truth to the ground." Verse
12. It wars against the truth;
the sanctuary is "cast down" and "trodden
underfoot," and this "by reason of transgression." Verses
11-13. The climax is reached when
he stands "up against the Prince of princes." He is then
"broken without hand." Verse 25. When Daniel saw all this in vision, it so affected him that he "fainted,
and was sick certain days." He was "astonished at the
vision," and neither he nor any one else understood it. Verse
27.
We are especially
interested in the time mentioned in verse fourteen. The conversation
carried on between the two angels was evidently for Daniel's benefit. The
vision of the ram and the he-goat seems to be related merely to lead up to the
story of the little horn that became "exceeding great."
When Daniel saw the persecutions carried on by this power, and how it should
prosper by crafty methods and magnify itself and "destroy
wonderfully," he naturally wondered how long this would
continue. In the conversation of the angels he is told that there is to
be a period of twenty-three hundred days during which time "both the
sanctuary and the host" is "to be trodden underfoot,"
and this evil power will prosper.
How could this power
"be mighty, but not by his own power"? That seems a
contradiction in terms. How could it "cast down some of the host
and of the stars to the ground" and stamp upon them? How could
it cast down the sanctuary and tread it underfoot? How could it "cast
down the truth to the ground," and prosper in so doing? Yet all
this it was to do. Verses 24,10-12,25.
Daniel was astonished, and did not understand the vision.
But he was more than
astonished. When he saw what this power would do to the sanctuary, to
religion, to God's people, to the truth, he "was sick certain
days." Verse 27. Here was
a blasphemous power that would persecute God's people and attempt to destroy
the truth, and prosper in so doing. Even the sanctuary would be cast down
and trodden underfoot. The one ray of hope in the whole vision concerned
the time. The sanctuary and the truth would not always be trodden
underfoot. The truth would come into its own again. It would be
vindicated. At the end of twenty-three hundred days the sanctuary would
be cleansed. To that time God's people were to look.
This in itself,
however, could not be of great comfort to Daniel. What did the
twenty-three hundred days mean? When did they begin? When did they
end? He did not understand. He began to study more earnestly than
ever before. His study led him to understand "by books the number
of the years, whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet, that
he would accomplish seventy years in the desolation of Jerusalem. Dan.9:2. But he had as yet no light on the
twenty-three hundred days. Had they anything to do with the end of the
seventy years? Perhaps they began when that period ended? He did
not know. And so he betook himself to
prayer. He must have light on the question.
Some commentators
hold that the little horn that became exceeding great stands for the kingdom of
the Seleucidae, especially under such kings as
Antiochus Epiphanes and Antiochus the Great. This view is open to serious
objections. These kings did persecute. They were crafty, impious,
proud. It can hardly be said, however, that they were such more than many
others, before and since. It cannot be claimed that they were greater
than Alexander the Great. Yet the vision demands this. Antiochus
Epiphanes, whom many believe is especially referred to, was a persecutor; he
did interfere with the sanctuary service; but he was not so outstanding as to
merit the attention given the little horn in the vision. He did his
little part in the drama for a few years and passed on, leaving no mark such as
Alexander did, and would long ago have taken his place among the petty kings of
the period had it not been for the persistent effort of commentators to give
him undue prominence.
The vision in the
eighth chapter of Daniel is not an isolated vision. Medo-Persia
and Greece are not here spoken of for the first time. The seventh deals with a related
subject and mentions the beasts which represent Medo-Persia
and Greece, and also refers to a "little horn." The prophet
says: "I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them
another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up
by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a
mouth speaking great things." Dan.7:8. This little horn intrigued Daniel. He wanted to know more "of
that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look
was more stout than his fellows." Verse
20. He had seen that it "made
war with the saints, and prevailed against them."
Verse 21. He saw,
moreover, that it should "speak great words against Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and
think to change times and, laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a
time and times and the dividing of time." Verse 25. At last, however, "the
judgment shall sit, and they shall take, away his dominion, to consume and to
destroy it unto the end." Verse 26. The chapter ends: "Hitherto is the end of the
matter. As for me Daniel, my cogitations much troubled me, and my
countenance changed in me: but I kept the matter in my heart." Verse
28. It is easy to see that this
prophecy deals in a general way with the same events as the prophecy in the
eighth chapter.
Daniel was troubled
by what he had seen. He had -- in the seventh chapter -- been brought
face to face with a persecuting power that wore out the saints of the Most High,
that spoke great words against God, that would think to change times and laws,
that was diverse from other kings (verse 24), and that at last should be destroyed. This power was the "little
horn" that had eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth that spoke great
things. Who might that power be? Daniel did a great deal of
thinking and was perplexed. "My cogitations much troubled
me," he confesses. Verse 28. But he kept the matter in his heart. He was sure God had greater
light. "Hitherto is the end of the matter," he
said. The word "hitherto" is significant. Daniel
does not say: "This is the end of the matter," but, "Hitherto
is the end." That is, "This is the end so far.
There is more to come. We stop now, but more is coming."
That is the meaning of "hitherto." And more did
come. The eighth chapter deals again with this power, and the ninth
chapter has further explanation.
It is impossible to
conceive of the little horn of Daniel 7 as Antiochus Epiphanes or any other
Antiochus. Practically all Protestant commentators of the old school
agree in referring it to the Papacy, in which it is seen to meet a complete
fulfillment. How could it ever be true of any Antiochus that he "made
war with the saints, and prevailed against them; until the Ancient of days
came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High; and the time came
that the saints possessed the kingdom"? Verses 21,22. Antiochus is long since dead. He ruled but a short
time. Of what other power than the Papacy is it true that it wore out the
saints of the Most High, or attempted to change times and laws? Are not
the sagacity, the wisdom, the far-reaching policies of the Papacy, expressively
suggested by the horn that had "eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth
speaking great things"? Verse 8. We believe we stand on solid exegetical ground when we hold that
the little horn of Daniel 8 is Rome, first pagan, later papal, and the little
horn of Daniel 7, the Papacy.
These considerations
will help us in our attempt to establish the meaning of the twenty-three
hundred days of Daniel 8:14. They occur in the midst of a prophecy
dealing with a power that has existed longer than any other power on
earth. Since this is part of a prophecy, doubtless prophetic time is here
mentioned. If so, the twenty-three hundred days stand for twenty-three
hundred years, according to well-established prophetic interpretation. "I
have appointed thee each day for a year." Eze.4:6.
If we accept the
view that the little horn of Daniel 8 refers to imperial Rome and the Roman
Catholic Church, it becomes our duty to discover any possible connection
between it and the sanctuary as mentioned in Daniel 8:14. To this study
we shall now address ourselves.
The Roman Catholic
Church is an attempt to reestablish the old theocracy
of Israel with the accompanying sanctuary service. The Catholic Church has
taken over the essential ritual from Judaism with certain ceremonials from
paganism. It has an established sanctuary service with its priests, high
priest, Levites, singers, and teachers. It has a sacrificial service
culminating in the mass, with the accompanying ritual and offering of
incense. It has its high days patterned after the Israelitish
custom. It has its candles, its altar of incense, its table with the
bread, and its high altar. The laver with holy water is in evidence; the
daily mass is observed. The parallel between the old Israelitish religion
and the Roman Catholic religion is almost complete.
All this would not
be very important were it not for the fact that it constitutes an attempt to
obscure the real work of Christ in the sanctuary above. When the Old
Testament period closed, when Christ began His work in the heavenly sanctuary,
it was God's intent that the sanctuary services on earth should cease.
The veil of the temple was rent in twain, --and later the temple was entirely
destroyed, --signifying the cessation of the service on earth and the
inauguration of the service in heaven. Christ entered into a temple not
built with hands. He entered into heaven itself, there to minister on our
behalf. Men are invited to come to Him with their sins and receive
forgiveness. The service in the earthly tabernacle had prepared men to
look to the real sanctuary in heaven. The time had come for the transfer
to be made.
The Catholic Church
completely fails to understand or appreciate the work of our High Priest in
heaven above. It fails to understand that the earthly sanctuary service
was no longer of avail. It reestablished the
old ceremonies and beliefs, and attempted to bring men back to a discarded
ritual. And it succeeded in doing so to a large extent. "All
the world wondered after the beast." Rev.13:3.
This, as has been
noted above, tended to obscure the work of Christ. Men lost the knowledge
of the sanctuary in heaven and of Christ's work there. Their attention
was called to the rival work of His pretended vicar on earth. While
Christ in heaven forgives sin, the priest on earth claims to do the same.
While Christ intercedes for the sinner, so does the priest. And the terms
of the priest for the forgiveness of sin are much more easily met than the
terms of Christ. Men forgot entirely that there is a sanctuary in
heaven. That truth was cast to the ground. Century after century
rolled by and the church kept men in complete ignorance of the all-important
work going on in heaven above, while it extolled its own wares and made
merchandise of all that is most sacred. The Papacy thus in a real sense
became a competitor, a rival of Christ. It attempted to supersede Him in
the minds of men, and succeeded to a remarkable degree. It is the
church's God-given work to call attention to Christ and the truth. It is
the one agency God has to instruct men. When Christ ascended on high to
begin His ministry in the sanctuary above, it was the duty and the privilege of
the church to proclaim that news to the ends of the world. Henceforth,
there were to be no more sacrifices on earth. That belonged to the old
dispensation. The Levitical priesthood had also ceased. The veil
was rent and a new and a living way opened for man. Men had free access
to God and might appear boldly before the throne of grace without any human
intercessor. All God's people had become a royal priesthood and
henceforth no man was to step between a soul and its Maker. The way of
access was opened to all.
That the Papacy had
become a rival, a competitor of Christ, is no mere figure of speech.
Consider the situation. Christ is our High Priest. On Calvary He
died as the Lamb of God. He shed His blood in our behalf. The
Mosaic sacrifices had been prophetic of this for centuries. Now the
reality had come, of which the other had been shadows. As in the Old
Testament the death of the lamb was not enough, but must be supplemented by the
ministration of the priest as he sprinkled the blood on the altar or in the
holy place, so with the death and blood of Christ. The blood having been
provided, Christ became "a minister of the sanctuary, and of the true
tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man." Heb.8:2. Thus "Christ being come a high priest of
good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with
hands, that is to say, not of this building; neither by the blood of goats and
calves, but by His own blood He entered in once into the holy place, having
obtained eternal redemption for us." Heb.9:11,12.
The holy place here
mentioned does not have reference to the tabernacle on earth. "For
Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the
figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of
God for us." Heb.9:24. Before
the presence of God Christ pleads and ministers His blood which not merely
sanctifies "to the purifying of the flesh" as did the blood of
bullocks and goats of old. "How much more shall the blood of
Christ, who through the Eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God,
purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?" Heb.9:14. Any one who wishes to have his
conscience purged may therefore with "boldness... enter into the
holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way, which He hath
consecrated for us, though the veil, that is to say, His flesh; and having a
High Priest over the house of God; let us draw near with a true heart in full
assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and
our bodies washed with pure water." Heb.10:19-22. In the Old Testament none but the
priest could enter the sanctuary. Now all may come. It is a "new
and living way, which he hath consecrated for us."
This blessed new and
living way it is the privilege and duty of the church to proclaim. Every
one may come to Christ direct. Not as in the sanctuary on earth need a
priest intervene. That is done away with. Every man may face his
Maker direct without human interference. He may boldly enter through the
veil.
But the Papacy
thought and taught otherwise. It attempted to reestablish
the Old Testament belief, that man can approach his Maker only through special
representatives, such as the priests. Men were put farther from God than
ever. The church closed the new and the living way opened by Christ, and
had men approach God through the priesthood, who had to appeal to some patron
saint who had influence with Mary, who had influence with Christ, who had
influence with God. The whole system was an attempted reincarnation of
the Mosaic ordinances which had definitely been abolished, and which were not
to be compared to the new and living way of the New Testament.
What has been the
result? Men have flocked to the Church of Rome and forsaken the sanctuary
and the Minister of the sanctuary in heaven. The Roman church has
effectively obscured the ministry of Christ, so much so that few Christians
even know that there is a temple in heaven, much less that there is a service
going on there. Day after day Christ stands waiting to minister His
blood, hoping that men will find the new way. But very few come. On
the other hand, millions flock to the Roman church, there to receive indulgence
and forgiveness of sin on acceptable terms.
The Papacy has
nearly succeeded in making of none effect Christ's ministry. It has
inaugurated another ministry, established, not on the promises of the gospel,
not on the new covenant basis, not on Christ as the High Priest, but on the
vain promises of an earthly priesthood which itself needs forgiveness and the
power of the atoning blood of Christ.
In saying that the
Papacy has attempted to substitute a false mediatorial system for the true
mediatorial work of Christ, we are well aware of the fact that the Roman
Catholic Church believes in Christ's sacrifice on the cross, that He is man's
advocate and intercessor and that through Him we are saved. On this the
following statements are to the point:
"There is
nothing from which the faithful should derive greater joy than from the
reflection that Jesus Christ is constituted our advocate and intercessor with
the Father, with whom His influence and authority are supreme." "True, there is but one mediator, Christ the Lord, who
alone has reconciled us through His blood (1Tim.2:5), and who, having accomplished our redemption, and having once entered
into the holy of holies, ceases not to intercede for us. Heb.9:12;
7:25."
--Catechism of the Council of Trent, pp.59,247, Rev. J. Donovan's
translation, 1829 edition.
"We can go to
God with all confidence, says St. Arnold, because the Son is our mediator with
the eternal Father, and the mother is our mediatrix with her Son."--Glories of
Mary, Alphonus Ligouri,
Doctor of the Church, p.224, revised edition.
It is in the
ministration of the blood, in the relationship existing between man and Christ,
that the Papacy has attempted to erect a false system. Here saints, and
especially Mary, have been interposed between the soul and God. This we
believe to be a most serious perversion of truth, in that it interposes extramediatorial persons as necessary to approach God, when
the Scriptures teach that there is "one mediator between God and man,
the man Christ Jesus." 1Tim.2:5. The Bible recognizes no other as mediator, and for the church to
teach otherwise, is to make of none effect the truth of God.
There are thus two
ministrations that promise men forgiveness and the blotting out of sins: That
of Christ in heaven, and of the Papacy on earth. Each has a priesthood
and accompanying service. Each claims full pardoning power. The
Papacy boasts of having the keys of heaven. It can open or shut. It
has a treasury of merits without which few can be saved. It is in
possession of the "host," the holy mystery of God. It
possesses an infallible head. It has power over purgatory. It can
remit punishment. It claims authority over the kings of the earth.
It acknowledges no superior. It is supreme.
All these claims
would fall to the ground if men were only cognizant of the true ministry of
Christ. A knowledge of the sanctuary truth is the only antidote to the
false claims of the hierarchy of Rome. For this reason
it is important to the Papacy that the sanctuary subject remain unknown.
For this reason God has made His people the depositories of His truth
concerning the sanctuary.
We need not go into
detail concerning the mathematical problems of the twenty-three hundred days.
The reader is referred to "The Great Controversy," by Ellen G.
White, and other standard Adventist works. Suffice it to say that these
days -- or rather years -- began 457 B.C. and ended 1844 A.D. At this latter
date, the sanctuary should be cleansed.
It is evident that
this cleansing cannot have reference to the sanctuary on earth. That was
long ago destroyed and its service discontinued. It must therefore have
reference to the sanctuary in heaven, which indeed is spoken of as being cleansed
"with better sacrifices than" those of the Old Testament.
Heb.9:23.
We have already
discussed in detail the matter of the cleansing of the sanctuary on
earth. This cleansing was a type of the cleansing of the sanctuary in
heaven. As the priests served in the first apartment of the tabernacle
every day of the year until the great Day of Atonement, so Christ ministered in
the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary until the time of its
cleansing. That time was 1844. Then Christ entered upon the final
phase of His ministry. Then He entered the most holy. Then the hour
of judgment began, otherwise called the investigative judgment. When that
work is done, probation ceases and Christ comes. We would at this time
call attention to the word "cleansed" as used in Daniel
8:14. In Hebrews it is tsadaq, and is
translated "justified," to become or be counted
righteous. Some translate: "Then shall the sanctuary be
justified." Others, "Then shall the sanctuary be
vindicated." Others again, "Then shall the sanctuary come into
its own again." The word contains the idea of restoration as
well as of cleansing.
These meanings of
the word are significant in view of the fact that the subject of the sanctuary
has been trodden underfoot and the truth cast to the ground. Shall the
time ever come when the subject of the sanctuary shall again be given its
rightful place, when God shall vindicate His truth, and error and secret
machination be uncovered? Yes, answers prophecy, the time shall come; an evil
power shall arise that will persecute God's people, obscure the sanctuary
question, cast truth to the ground, and prosper in doing it. It shall set
up its own system in competition with God's, attempt to change the law, and by
its crafty policy deceive many. But it shall be unmasked. At the
end of the twenty-three hundred days a people shall arise who will have light
on the sanctuary question, who follow Christ by faith into the most holy, who
have the solution to break the power of the mystery of iniquity, and who go
forth to battle for God's truth. Such a people is
invincible. It will proclaim the truth fearlessly. It will make the
supreme contribution in its advocacy of the sanctuary truth. It will "build
the old waste places;" it will "raise up the foundation of
many generations;" it shall "be called, The repairer of the
breach, The restorer of paths to dwell in." Isa.58:12.
The final
controversies will be clear-cut. All will understand the issues and the
consequences. The chief point will be the worship of the beast or the
worship of God. In this controversy the temple of God will be opened in
heaven, and men will see "in His temple the ark of His testament."
Rev.11:19. God's people on earth will have a part
in showing men the opened temple. On the other hand, the apostate church
will blaspheme "against God... blaspheme His name, and His tabernacle,
and them that dwell in heaven." Rev.13:6.
It is a special
privilege to be permitted to have a part in such a work as this. But if
we are to conquer, we must know where we stand and why. May God give us
grace to be found faithful.
THE LAST GENERATION
Chapter NINETEEN
THE FINAL DEMONSTRATION OF WHAT THE gospel can do in and for humanity is
still in the future. Christ showed the way. He took a human body,
and in that body demonstrated the power of God. Men are to follow His
example and prove that what God did in Christ, He can do in every human being
who submits to Him. The world is awaiting this demonstration. Rom.8:19. When it has been accomplished, the end
will come. God will have fulfilled His plan. He will have shown Himself
true and Satan a liar. His government will stand vindicated.
There is much
spurious doctrine concerning holiness taught in the world today. On the
one hand are those who deny the power of God to save from sin. On the
other hand are those who flaunt their sanctity before men and would have us
believe that they are without sin. Among the first class are not only
unbelievers and skeptics, but church members whose vision does not include victory
over sin, but who accept a kind of compromise with sin. In the other
class are such as have no just conception either of sin or of God's holiness,
whose spiritual vision is so impaired that they cannot see their own
shortcomings, and hence believe themselves perfect, and whose conception of
religion is such that their own understanding of truth and righteousness is
superior to that revealed in the word. It is not easy to decide which is
the greater error.
That the Bible
inculcates holiness is indisputable. "The very God of peace sanctify
you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved
blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." 1Thess.5:23. "Follow peace with all men,
and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord." Heb.12:14. "For this is the will of God,
even your sanctification." 1Thess.4:3. The Greek word hagios in its various
forms is translated "sanctify," "holy," "holiness,"
"sanctified," "sanctification." It is
the same word which is used for the two apartments of the sanctuary, and means
that which is set apart for God. A sanctified person is one who is set
apart for God, whose whole life is dedicated to Him.
The plan of
salvation must of necessity include not only forgiveness of sin, but complete
restoration. Salvation from sin is more than forgiveness of sin.
Forgiveness presupposes sin and is conditional upon breaking with it;
sanctification is apart from sin and indicates deliverance from its power and
victory over it. The first is a means to neutralize the effect of sin;
the second is a restoration of power for complete victory.
Sin, like some
diseases, leaves man in a deplorable condition, --weak, despondent,
disheartened. He has little control of his mind, his will fails him, and
with the best of intentions he is unable to do what he knows to be right.
He feels that there is no hope. He knows that he has himself to blame,
and remorse fills his soul. To his bodily ailments is added the torture
of conscience. He knows he has sinned and is to blame. Will no one
take pity on him?
Then comes the
gospel. The good news is preached to him. Though his sins be as
scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they
shall be as wool. All is forgiven. He is "saved."
What a wonderful deliverance it is! His mind is at rest. No longer
does his conscience torment him. He has been forgiven. His sins are
cast into the depths of the sea. His heart wells with praise to God for
His mercy and goodness to him.
As a disabled ship
towed to port is safe but not sound, so the man is "saved" but
not sound. Repairs need to be made on the ship before it is pronounced
seaworthy, and the man needs reconstruction before he is fully restored.
This process of restoration is called sanctification, and includes in its
finished product body, soul, and spirit. When the work is finished, the
man is "holy," completely sanctified, and restored to the
image of God. It is for this demonstration of what the gospel can do for
a man that the world is looking.
In the Bible, both
the process and the finished work are spoken of as sanctification. For
this reason the "brethren" are spoken of as holy and
sanctified, though they have not attained to perfection. 1Cor.1:2;
2Cor.1:1; Heb.3:1. A glance
through the epistles to the Corinthians will soon convince one that the saints
mentioned had their faults. Despite this, they are said to be "sanctified"
and "called to be saints." The reason is that complete
sanctification is not the work of a day or a year, but of a lifetime. It
begins the moment a person is converted, and continues through life.
Every victory hastens the process. There are few Christians who have not
gained the mastery over some sin that formerly greatly annoyed them and
overcame them. Many a man who has been a slave to the tobacco habit has
gained the victory over the habit and rejoices in his victory. Tobacco
has ceased to be a temptation. It attracts him no more. He has the
victory. On that point he is sanctified. As he has been victorious
over one besetment, so he is to become victorious over every sin. When
the work is completed, when he has gained the victory over pride, ambition,
love of the world,--over all evil,--he is ready for translation. He has
been tried in all points. The evil one has come and has found
nothing. Satan has no more temptations for him. He has overcome
them all. He stands without fault even before the throne of God.
Christ places His seal upon him. He is safe, and he is sound. God
has finished His work in him. The demonstration of what God can do with
humanity is complete.
Thus it shall be
with the last generation of men living on the earth. Through them, God's
final demonstration of what He can do with humanity will be given. He
will take the weakest of the weak, those bearing all the sins of their
forefathers, and in them show the power of God. They will be subjected to
every temptation, but they will not yield. They will demonstrate that it
is possible to live without sin--the very demonstration for which the world has
been looking and for which God has been preparing. It will become evident
to all that the gospel really can save to the uttermost. God is found
true in His sayings.
The last year brings
the final test; but this only proves to angels and to the world that nothing
that the evil one can do will shake God's chosen ones. The plagues fall,
destruction is on every hand, death stares them in the face, but like Job, they
hold fast their integrity. Nothing can make them sin. They "keep
the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus." Rev.14:12.
Throughout the
history of the world, God has had His faithful ones. They have endured
affliction even in the midst of great tribulation. And even in the midst of Satan's buffetings they have, as the apostle
Paul says, through faith "wrought righteousness." "They
were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword:
they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted,
tormented; (of whom the world was not worthy:) they wandered in deserts, and in
mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth." Heb.11:37.
And in addition to
this galaxy of faithful witnesses, many of whom were martyrs for their faith,
God will have in the last days a remnant, a "little flock" as
it were, in and through whom He will give to the universe a demonstration of
His love, His power, His justice, which, if we except Christ's godly life on
earth and His supreme sacrifice on Calvary, will be the most sweeping and
conclusive demonstration of all the ages.
It is in the last
generation of men living on the earth that God's power unto sanctification will
stand fully revealed. The demonstration of that power is God's
vindication. It clears Him of any and all charges which Satan has placed
against Him. In the last generation God is vindicated and Satan
defeated. This may need some further amplification. The rebellion
which took place in heaven and introduced sin into the universe of God, must
have been a fearful experience both for God and for the angels. Up to a
certain point, all had been peace and harmony. Discord was unknown; only
love prevailed. Then unholy ambitions stirred the heart of Lucifer.
He decided that he wanted to be like the Most High. He would exalt his
throne above the stars of God. Not only that, but he also intended to sit
"upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north."
Isa.14:12-14. This statement is tantamount to an
attempt to depose God and usurp His place. It is a declaration of
war. Where God sat, Satan would sit. God accepted the
challenge.
We have no direct
biblical statement as to the means used by Satan in winning over to his side a
multitude of angels. That he lied is clear. That he was a murderer
from the beginning is likewise indisputable. John 8:44. As murder has its beginning in hatred, and as this hatred found
its fruition in the killing of the Son of God on Calvary, we may believe that
Satan's hatred was not only directed against God the Father, but also--and
perhaps especially -- against God the Son. In his rebellion, Satan went
farther than a mere threat. He actually did set up his throne, saying, "I
am a God, I sit in the seat of God." Exe.28:2.
When Satan thus
established his government in heaven, the issue was clear-cut. None of
the angels could be in doubt any more. All must take their stand for or
against Satan.
In case of rebellion
there is always some grievance, real or fancied, given as the cause.
Dissatisfaction arises in some, and failing to get matters remedied, these
resort to rebellion. Those who sympathize with the rebel cause join
it. The others remain loyal to the government, and must of course take
their chance on its survival.
It apparently came
to just such a pass in heaven. The result was war. "There
was war in heaven: Michael and His angels fought against the dragon; and the
dragon fought and his angels." Rev.12:7. The outcome could have been fore- seen. Satan and his angels
"prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the devil, and
Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast
out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him." Verses
8,9.
Satan was defeated,
but not destroyed. By his act of rebellion he had declared God's
government at fault, and by the setting up of his own throne he had made claim
to greater wisdom or justice than God. These claims are inherent in
rebellion and in the establishment of another government. God could ill
afford not to give Satan an opportunity to demonstrate his theories. To
remove every doubt in the minds of the angels -- and later of man -- God must
let Satan go on with his work. And so Satan was permitted to live and set
up his government. For the last six thousand years he has been giving the
universe a demonstration of what he will do when he has the opportunity.
This demonstration
has been permitted to continue until now. And what a demonstration it has
been! From the time when Cain killed Abel there have been hatred, blood-shed,
cruelty, and oppression in the earth. Virtue, goodness, and justice have
suffered; vice, vileness, and corruption have triumphed. The just man has
been made a prey; God's messengers have been tortured and killed; God's law has
been trampled in the dust. When God sent His Son, instead of honoring
Him, evil men, under the instigation of Satan, hanged Him on a tree. Even
then God did not destroy Satan. The demonstration must be complete.
Only when the last events are taking place, and men are on the point of
exterminating one another, will God interfere to save His own. There will
then remain no doubt in the mind of any one that had Satan the power, he would
destroy every vestige of goodness, hurl God from the throne, murder the Son of
God, and establish a kingdom of violence founded in self-seeking and cruel
ambition.
What Satan has been
demonstrating is really his character, and the lengths to which selfish
ambition will lead. In the beginning he wanted to be like God. He
was dissatisfied with his position as the highest of created beings. He
wanted to be God. And the demonstration has shown that oftentimes when a
person has set his mind upon a selfish goal, he will stop short of nothing to
attain it. Whoever stands in the way must be put out of the way. If
it be God Himself, He must be removed.
The demonstration
also teaches that high position is not satisfactory to the ambitious
individual. He must have the highest, and even then he is not
satisfied. A person in a lowly position is tempted to believe that he
would be satisfied if his position were improved. He is at least sure
that he would be satisfied if he had the highest position possible. But
would he? Lucifer was not. He had the highest position
possible. But he was not satisfied. He wanted one still
higher. He wanted to be God Himself.
In this respect the
contrast between Christ and Satan is very pronounced. Satan wanted to be
God. He wanted it so much that he was willing to do anything to attain
his goal. Christ, on the other hand, did not consider it a thing to be
grasped to be like God. He voluntarily humbled Himself and became
obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. He was God, and He
became man. And that this was not a temporary arrangement only for the
purpose of showing His willingness, is evidenced by the fact that He will ever
remain man. Satan exalted himself; Christ humbled Himself. Satan
wanted to become God; Christ became man. Satan wanted to sit as God on a
throne; Christ, as a servant, knelt to wash the disciples' feet. The
contrast is complete.
In heaven, Lucifer
had been one of the covering cherubs. Eze.28:14. This seems to refer to the two angels who in the most holy
apartment of the sanctuary stood on the ark, covering the mercy seat.
This was doubtless the highest office an angel could occupy, for the ark and
the mercy seat were in the immediate presence of God. These angels were
the special guardians of the law. They watched over it, as it were.
Lucifer was one of them.
Ezekiel 28:12
contains an interesting statement concerning Lucifer: "Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in
beauty." The expression to which we would call attention is: "Thou
sealest up the sum." The meaning of
this is not entirely clear. The reading is capable of varied
interpretations. It seems evident, however, that the intent is to show
the high position and exalted privilege that was Satan's before he fell.
He was a kind of prime minister, a keeper of the seal.
As in an earthly
government a document or law must have the seal attached to it in order to be
valid, so in God's government a seal is used. God seems to have
apportioned to the angels their work, the same as He has given to man his
work. One angel is in charge of the fire. Rev.14:18. Another angel has charge of the waters. Rev.16:5. Another has charge of "the
seal of the living God." Rev.7:2. While, as stated above, the reading of Ezekiel
28:12 is not entirely clear, some feel justified in translating it: "Thou
attacheth the seal to the ordinance. "
If this position is tenable, if Lucifer was prime minister and keeper of the
seal, it gives an additional reason why he should wish to substitute his own
mark for that of God's seal when he left his first abode.
That Satan has been
very active against the law is evident. If God's law is His character,
and if this character is the very opposite of Satan's, Satan stands condemned
by it. Christ and the law are one. Christ is the law lived out, the
law becomes flesh. For this reason His life constitutes a
condemnation. When Satan warred against Christ, he warred also against
the law. When he hated the law, he also hated Christ. Christ and
the law are inseparable.
An interesting statement
is found in the fortieth psalm. Christ speaking, says, "I delight
to do Thy will, O my God: yea, Thy law is within My
heart." Verse 8. While
this is doubtless a poetical expression and should not be pressed too far, it
is interesting, nevertheless, as an indication of the exalted position of the
law. "Thy law is within My heart." A stab at the
law is a stab at the heart of Christ. A stab at the heart of Christ is a
stab at the law. At the cross Satan so intended it. But God meant
it otherwise. The death of Christ was a tribute to the law. It
immeasurably magnified the law and made it honorable. It gave men a new
vision of its sacredness and worth. If God would let His Son die; if
Christ would willingly give Himself, rather than abrogate the law; if it is
easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one jot or tittle of the law
to fail, how very sacred and honorable the law must be!
When Christ died on
the cross He had demonstrated in His life the possibility of keeping the
law. Satan had not succeeded in leading Christ into sin. Possibly
he did not expect to be able to do that. But if he could have induced
Christ to use His divine power to save Himself, He would have accomplished
much. Had Christ done so, Satan could have claimed that this invalidated
the demonstration God intended to make, namely, that it was possible for man to
keep the law. As it was, Satan was defeated. But till the very
last, he continued the same tactics. Judas hoped Christ would free
Himself, thus using His divine power to save Himself. On the cross Christ
was taunted: "He saved others; Himself He cannot save."
But Christ did not falter. He could have saved Himself, but He did
not. Satan was baffled. He could not understand. But he knew
that when Christ died without his having been able to make Him sin, his own
doom was sealed. In His death Christ was victor.
But Satan did not
give up. He had failed in his conflict with Christ, but he might yet
succeed with men. So he went to "make war with the remnant of her
seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus
Christ." Rev.12:17. If he
could overcome them, he might not be defeated.
The demonstration
which God intends to make with the last generation on earth, means much both to
the people and to God. Can God's law really be kept? That is a
vital question. Many will deny that it can be done; others will glibly
say it can. When the whole question of commandment keeping is considered,
the problem assumes large proportions. God's law is exceedingly broad; it
takes cognizance of the thoughts and intents of the heart. It judges
motives as well as acts, thoughts as well as words. Commandment keeping
means entire sanctification, a holy life, unswerving allegiance to right,
entire separation from sin, and victory over it. Well may mortal man cry
out, Who is sufficient for these things!
Yet this is the task
which God has set Himself and which He expects to accomplish. When the
statement and challenge is issued by Satan: "No one can keep the
law. It is impossible. If there be any that can do it or that have
done it, show them to me. Where are they that can keep the
commandments?" God will quietly answer, Here
they are. "Here are they that keep the commandments of God, and
the faith of Jesus." Rev.14:12.
Let us say it
reverently: God must meet Satan's challenge. It is not part of God's
plan, or a part of His purpose, to subject men to tests that only a chosen few
can survive. In the Garden of Eden God could think of no easier test than
the one He devised. No one will ever be justified in saying that our
first parents fell because the test was too hard for them. It was the
lightest test conceivable. If they fell, it was not because they had not
been provided with strength to resist. The temptation was not held before
them constantly. Satan was not permitted to molest them everywhere.
He could have access to them only at one place, namely, at the tree of
knowledge. That place they knew. They could stay away from it if
they wanted to. Satan could not follow them. If they went where he
was, it was because they wanted to. But even if they went there to
examine the tree, they need not remain there. They could walk away.
Even if Satan offered them the fruit, they need not take it. But they
took it and ate. And they ate it because they wanted to, not because they
had to. They deliberately transgressed. There was no excuse.
God could not have devised an easier test.
When God commands
men to keep His law, it does not serve the purpose He has in mind to have only
a few men keep it, just enough to show it can be done. It is not in line
with God's character to pick outstanding men of strong pur-
pose and superb training, and demonstrate through them what He can do. It
is much more in harmony with His plan to make His requirements such that even
the weakest need not fail, so that none can ever say that God demands that
which can be done by only a few. It is for this reason that God has
reserved His greatest demonstration for the last generation. This
generation bears the results of accumulated sins. If any are weak, they
are. If any suffer from inherited tendencies, they do. If any have
an excuse because of weakness of any kind, they have. If therefore these
can keep the commandments, there is no excuse for any one in any other
generation not doing so also.
But this is not
enough. God intends in His demonstration to show, not merely that
ordinary men of the last generation can successfully pass a test such as He
gave to Adam and Eve, but that they can survive a test much harder than such as
falls to the lot of common men. It will be a test comparable to the one
Job passed through, and approaching that which the Master underwent. It
will test them to the utmost.
"Ye have heard
of the patience of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord; that the Lord is
very pitiful, and of tender mercy." James 5:11. Job passed through some experiences
that will be repeated in the lives of the chosen ones of the last
generation. It may be well to consider them.
Job was a good
man. God trusted him. Day by day he offered sacrifices for his
sons. "It may be that my sons have sinned," he said. Job 1:5. He was prosperous and enjoyed the
blessing of God.
Then came "a
day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan
came also among them." Verse 6. A conversation is recorded between the Lord and Satan that
concerns Job. The Lord says that Job is a good man, which Satan does not
deny, but urges that Job is God-fearing merely because it pays him to be
so. He states that if God will take away His mercies, Job will curse
God. The statement is in the form of a challenge, and God accepts
it. Satan is given permission to take away Job's property and otherwise
to cause him sorrow, but not to touch Job himself.
Satan immediately
proceeds to do what he is permitted to do. Job's property is all swept
away, and his children are killed. When this happens, "Job arose,
and rent his mantle, and shaved his head, and fell down upon the ground, and
worshiped, and said, Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I
return thither: the Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away; blessed be the
name of the Lord. In all this Job sinned not, nor charged God
foolishly." Job 1:20-22.
Satan is defeated,
but he makes another attempt. At the next meeting with the Lord, without
admitting defeat, he claims that he had not been permitted to touch Job
himself. If he had, he claims, Job would have sinned. The statement
is again a challenge, and God accepts it. Satan is given permission to
torment Job, but not to take his life. He immediately departs on his
mission.
All that the evil
one can do, Satan does to Job. But Job stands fast. His wife
counsels him to give up, but he does not waver. Under intense physical
pain and mental anguish, he remains steadfast. Again it is recorded that
Job stood the test. "In all this did not Job sin with his
lips." Job 2:10. Satan is
defeated and does not appear any more in the book.
In the succeeding
chapters in the book of Job, we are given a little insight into the struggle
going on in Job's mind. He is greatly perplexed. Why has all this
calamity come upon him? He is not conscious of any sin. Why, then, should
God afflict him? He, of course, does not know of the challenge of Satan.
Neither does he know that God is depending upon him in the crisis through which
he is passing. All he knows is that out of a clear sky, disaster has come
upon him till he is left without family or property, and with a loathsome
disease that nearly overwhelms him. He does not understand, but he
retains his integrity and faith in God. This God knew he would do.
This Satan said he would not do. In the challenge God won.
Humanly speaking,
Job had not deserved the punishment that came to him. God Himself says it
was without cause. "Thou movedst me
against him, to destroy him without cause." Job 2:3.
The whole experiment can therefore be justified only by considering it
as a specific test devised for a specific purpose. God wanted to silence
Satan's charge that Job served God only for profit. He wanted to
demonstrate that there was at least one man whom Satan could not control.
Job suffered as a result of it, but there seemed to be no other way. A
reward was afterward given him.
Job's case is
recorded for a purpose. While we grant its historicity, we believe that
it has also a wider meaning. God's people in the last days will pass
through an experience similar to Job's. They will be tested as he was;
they will have every earthly stay removed; Satan will he given permission to
torment them. In addition to this the Spirit of God will be withdrawn
from the earth, and the protection of earthly governments removed. God's
people will be left alone to battle with the powers of darkness. They
will be perplexed, as was Job. But they, as did he, will hold fast their
integrity.
In the last
generation God will stand vindicated. In the remnant Satan will meet his
defeat. The charge that the law cannot be kept will be met and fully
refuted. God will produce not only one or two who keep His commandments,
but a whole group, spoken of as the 144,000. They will reflect the image
of God fully. They will have disproved Satan's accusation against the
government of heaven.
A serious situation
arose in heaven when Satan made his charges against God. The accusations
in reality constituted an impeachment. Many of the angels believed the
charges. They ranged themselves on the side of the accuser. One
third of the angels--and that must have been millions -- faced God with their
leader, the highest among the angels, Lucifer. It was no small
crisis. It threatened the very existence of God's government. How
should God deal with it?
The only way the
matter could be satisfactorily settled so that no question would ever arise,
was for God to submit His case to the ordinary rules of evidence. Was, or
was not, God's government just? God said it was; Satan said it was
not. God could have destroyed Satan. But that would be no argument,
and would count against God. There was no other way than for each side to
present its evidence, produce its witnesses, and rest its case on the weight of
testimony adduced.
The picture, then,
is that of a court scene. God's government is at stake. Satan is
the accuser; God Himself is the accused and is on trial. He has been
charged with injustice, with requiring his creatures to do that which they
cannot do, and yet punishing them for not doing it. The law is the
specific point of attack; but the law being merely a transcript of God's
character, it is God and His character that are the points at issue.
In order for God to sustain His contention, it is
necessary for Him to show that He has not been arbitrary in His requirements,
that the law is not harsh and cruel in its requirement, but contrariwise, that
it is holy, just, and good, and that men can keep it. All that is
necessary is for God to produce one man who has kept the law, and His case is
won. In the absence of such a case, God loses, and Satan wins. The
outcome therefore hinges on the production of one or more who keep the
commandments of God. On this God has staked His government.
While it is true
that many from time to time have dedicated their lives to God and lived without
sin for periods of time, Satan claims that these are special cases, as was
Job's case, and do not come under the ordinary rules. He demands a
clear-cut case where there can be no doubt, and where God has not interfered.
Can such an instance be produced?
God is ready for the
challenge. He has bided his time. The Son of God, in His own
person, has met Satan's charges, and proved them false. The supreme
exhibition has been reserved until the final contest. Out of the last generation
God will select his chosen ones. Not the strong or the mighty, not the
honored or the rich, not the wise or the learned, but just ordinary people will
God take, and through and by them make His demonstration. Satan has
claimed that those who in the past have served God have done so with mercenary
motives, that God has pampered them, and that he, Satan, has not had free
access to them. If he were given full permission to present his case,
they also would be won over. But God is afraid to let him do this.
Give me a fair chance, Satan says, and I will win out.
And so, to silence
forever Satan's charges; to make it evident that His people are serving Him
from motives of loyalty and right without reference to reward; to clear His own
name and character of the charges of injustice and arbitrariness; and to show
to angels and men that His law can be kept by the weakest of men under the most
discouraging and most untoward circumstances, God permits Satan to try His
people to the utmost. They will be threatened, tortured,
persecuted. They will stand face to face with death in the issuance of
the decree to worship the beast and his image. Rev.13:15. But they will not yield. They are willing to die rather than
to sin.
God removes His
Spirit from the earth. Satan will have a greater measure of control than
he has ever had before. True, he may not kill God's people, but that is
about the only limitation. And he uses every permission he has. He
knows what is at stake. It is now or never.
God does one more
thing. He apparently hides Himself. The sanctuary in heaven is
closed. The saints cry to God day and night for deliverance, but He
appears not to hear. God's chosen ones are passing through
Gethsemane. They are having a little taste of Christ's experience those
three hours on the cross. Seemingly they must fight their battles
alone. They must live in the sight of a holy God without an intercessor.
But while Christ has
finished His intercession, so that from His priestly ministry in the heavenly sanctuary
none can obtain any more pardon for sin, yet the saints are still the object of
God's love and care. Holy angels watch over them. God provides them
shelter from their enemies; He provides them with food, shields them from
destruction, and supplies grace and power for holy living. (See Psalms
91.) Yet they are still in the world,
still tempted, afflicted, tormented.
Will they stand the
test? To human eyes it seems impossible. If only God would come to their
rescue, all would be well. They are determined to resist the evil
one. If need be they can die; but they need not sin. Satan has no
power -- and never had -- to make any man sin. He can tempt, he can
seduce, he can threaten; but he cannot compel. And now God demonstrates
through the weakest of the weak that there is no excuse, and never has been
any, for sinning. If men in the last generation can successfully repel
Satan's attack; if they can do this with all the odds against them and the
sanctuary closed, what excuse was there for men's ever sinning?
In the last
generation God gives the final demonstration that men can keep the law of God
and that they can live without sinning. God leaves nothing undone to make
the demonstration complete. The only limitation put upon Satan is that he
may not kill the saints of God. He may tempt them, he may harass and
threaten them; and he does his best. But he fails. He cannot make
them sin. They stand the test, and God puts His seal upon them.
Through the last
generation of saints God stands finally vindicated. Through them He
defeats Satan and wins His case. They form a vital part of the plan of
God. They go through terrific struggles; they battle with unseen powers
in high places. But they have put their trust in the Most High, and they
will not be ashamed. They have gone through hunger and thirst, but the
time shall come when "they shall hunger no more, neither thirst any
more; neither shall the sun light on them, nor any heat. For the Lamb
which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and
shall lead them unto living fountains of waters: and God shall wipe away all
tears from their eyes." Rev.7:16,17.
"They follow
the Lamb whithersoever He goeth." Rev.14:4. When at last the doors of the temple
shall swing open, a voice will sound forth: "Only the 144,000 enter
this place."--Early Writings, p.19. By faith they have followed the Lamb here. They have gone
with Him into the holy place, they have followed Him into the most holy.
And in the hereafter, only those who have thus followed Him here, will follow
Him there. They will be kings and priest. They will follow Him in
to the most holy where only the High Priest can ever enter. They shall
stand in the unveiled presence of God. They shall follow Him "whithersoever
He goeth." They will not only be "before the throne of
God" and "serve Him day and night in his temple," but
they will "sit down with Me in My throne, even as I also overcame, and
am set down with My Father in His throne." Rev.7:15;3:21.
The matter of
greatest importance in the universe is not the salvation of men, important as
that may seem. The most important thing is the clearing of God's name
from the false accusations made by Satan. The controversy is drawing to a
close. God is preparing His people for the last great conflict.
Satan is also getting ready. The issue is before us and will be decided
in the lives of God's people. God is depending upon us as He did upon
Job. Is His confidence well placed?
It is a wonderful
privilege vouchsafed this people to help clear God's name by our
testimony. It is wonderful that we are permitted to testify for
Him. It must never be forgotten, however, that this testimony is a
testimony of life, not merely of words. "In Him was life; and the
life was the light of men." John 1:4. "The life was the light." It was so with
Christ, it must also be so with us. Our life should be a light as His life was.
To give people the light is more than to hand them a tract. Our life is the
light. As we live, we give the light to others. Without life, without our
living the light, our words abide alone. But as our life becomes light,
our words become effective. It is our life that must testify for God.
May the church of
God appreciate the exalted privilege given her! "Ye are My witnesses,
saith the Lord." Isa.43:10. There must
be "no strange god among you: therefore ye are my witnesses, saith the
Lord, that I am God." Verse 12. May we be witnesses indeed, testifying what God has done for
us! All this is closely connected with the work of the Day of
Atonement. On that day the people of Israel, having confessed their sins,
were completely cleansed. They had already been forgiven, now sin was
separated from them. They were holy and without blame. The camp of
Israel was clean.
We are now living in
the great antitypical day of the cleansing of the sanctuary. Every sin
must be confessed and by faith be sent beforehand to judgment. As the
high priest enters into the most holy, so God's people now are to stand face to
face with God. They must know that every sin is confessed, that no
stain of sin remains. The cleansing of the sanctuary in heaven is
dependent upon the cleansing of God's people on earth. How important then
that God's people be holy and without blame! In them every sin must be
burned out, so that they will be able to stand in the sight of a holy God and
live with the devouring fire. "Hear, ye that are far off, what I
have done; and, ye that are near, acknowledge my might. The sinners in
Zion are afraid; fearfulness hath surprised the hypocrites. Who among us
shall dwell with the devouring fire? who among us shall dwell with
everlasting burnings? He that walketh righteously, and speaketh
uprightly; he that despiseth the gain of oppressions,
that shaketh his hands from holding of bribes, that stoppeth his ears from hearing of blood, and shutteth his
eyes from seeing evil; he shall dwell on high: his place of defense shall be
the munitions of rocks: bread shall be given him; his waters shall be
sure." Isa.33:13-16.
THE JUDGMENT
Chapter TWENTY
THERE IS A GROWING TENDENCY TO DISBELIEF in a bodily resurrection.
Higher critics have long ago discarded the idea, and many Christians of the
more conservative type are tending the same way. They can see no need of
a resurrection of the body if the future existence is wholly spiritual.
For the same reason
they consider a future judgment unnecessary. If the soul is already
enjoying the bliss of ethereal existence, or if it is already experiencing the
tortures of the damned, it would seem incongruous to interpose a
judgment. That should have taken place before the future state was
decided upon, not after. Belief in immediate bliss or damnation after
death makes a future judgment at the end of the world not only unnecessary but
inconsistent.
The Bible is plain
in its statements concerning these two subjects. There is a bodily
resurrection. There is a judgment. The Bible teaches both. As
we are here chiefly concerned with the judgment, we shall confine our study to
it, only remarking in passing that it seems so much more satisfying to believe
that the future existence of the saved will be molded somewhat on the original
plan of the Garden of Eden, where Adam and Eve enjoyed existence on a plane not
unlike our present one, yet without sin. It seems reasonable to believe
that God has not abandoned His original plan. If He has not, there must
be a resurrection of the body.
The idea of a
judgment at the end of the world presupposes that men do not enter upon their
punishment or reward at death. This seems reasonable, quite apart from
being supported by Bible evidence. Let us consider this a little more in
detail.
Taking for granted a
belief in punishment and reward, we would first remark that no man's record can
be made up completely at death. His life is closed, but his influence
continues,--his "works do follow" him. If we are
responsible for our influence,--and this must be
admitted, we believe,-- the record cannot be made up fully until the end of
time.
In saying this we do
not wish to infer that a man has not sealed his destiny when he dies. We
believe he has. All we wish to affirm is that unless the judgment
presupposes the same punishment or reward for all, the record cannot be made up
at death. It may, indeed, be argued that it is known whether a person is
saved or lost, and that therefore he may provisionally be admitted to one place
or another. This may be granted, but does not solve the difficulty.
Even in earthly courts the outcome of a committed crime is awaited before
judgment is pronounced. If, in a shooting affray a man is wounded,
judgment is not based on the immediate effect, but on the final outcome of the
shooting. The wounded man may linger for a week or two. The
criminal cannot demand an immediate trial and judgment, based, as it would have
to be, on the fact that the wounded man had not as yet died, and that hence the
criminal was not guilty of murder.
A man is responsible
for more than the immediate effect of his acts. It seems altogether more
reasonable that the judgment be delayed until all the facts are in, at which
time a just estimate can be arrived at. If we admit that some will be
punished with many stripes and some with few (Luke 12:48), the judgment cannot and must not take place until all factors can be
considered. This can be done only at the time God designates,--the end of
the world. In harmony with this is the statement that God will "reserve
the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished." 2Peter
2:9.
The wicked are to be
judged by the righteous. "The saints shall judge the world."
"The world shall be judged by you." 1Cor.6:2. As the angels have their work to do in heaven, so the redeemed
will have theirs. God makes His plans known to His own, and gives them
responsibilities to bear. The saints are given both the privilege and the
responsibility of judgment. Humanly speaking, God does not want to run
any risk of dissatisfaction or questionings. It is conceivable that some
persons will be lost who others thought should be saved. If some one is
missed in heaven, a question might come up concerning him in the mind of others
as to why. It may be a person who was dear to us,--whom we loved and for
whom we had prayed. Now he is lost. We don't know the
circumstances; we don't know why.
If we have had a
part in the judgment; if we ourselves have looked into the case and examined
the evidence; if after weighing all the factors, we have at last concluded that
the man did not want to be saved and would not be happy in heaven, no question
will ever arise in our minds as to the justice of what was done. We had a
part in the judgment; we know. We were there. We are
satisfied. Moreover, this arrangement assures both a just and a merciful judgment.
Some of those who will be lost, we have loved. We have prayed for
them. We will be kind to them till the last. No one will be
punished more than he deserves. God's plan assures that.
It should be noted
that the saints are to have a part in judging those whom they have known.
If part of the purpose of God in having us have a part in the judgment is to
make sure that no question will ever arise in our minds, the saints must judge
their own generation and their own acquaintances. This is both fearful
and good. God must not run the risk of having some one say or think: "Some
of my friends are lost, and I never had a chance to find out just what
happened. I thought they would be saved. I understood them better
than any one else. I wish I had known a little more of their case."
Such a thing, of course, will never happen. God will see to that.
Every one will be satisfied as to the justice and the mercy of God. God's
plan is rightly arranged. We shall know why certain people are
lost. We shall have a part in their judgment.
If what is said here
is correct, there can be no judgment at death. A group of Christians are
praying for a wayward young man. Day after day, year after year, they
pray, but without result. Then suddenly the young man dies. What
about the judgment? Those who know him, those who have prayed for him, are
still living. If the young man is to be judged by the saints immediately,
they would all have to die immediately if they are to have a part in his
judgment. Otherwise he would have to be judged by others who did not know
him. This holds true of all the wicked who have ever lived. They
could not ordinarily be judged until a generation after their death, if they
are to be judged by the saints. But not to be judged by the saints, or to
be judged by others unknown to them, would frustrate God's plan and jeopardize
it. We therefore hold that if the wicked are to be judged by the saints,
they cannot be judged at death. God says the wicked are reserved unto the
judgment at the end of the world.
While it is true
that each generation best understands itself and should be judged in the light
of its own knowledge, so that an Old Testament sinner should not be judged by
New Testament standards, it is also true that before any consistent judgment
can take place, there must be some knowledge as to general guiding rules and
principles. This presupposes instruction and education, and this
instruction must be based upon all factors involved. Christ's death must
be reckoned with, also His atonement and teaching. Just how, in view of
this, could the saints of the first generations on earth have judged the wicked
of their generation? It is evident that the idea of the saints having any
part in the judgment must be given up if the judgment takes place at
death. It is an admirable plan as God has conceived it. God's plan
to have the saints have a part in the judgment, makes heaven a safe place and
raises an effective barrier against further questionings and doubts.
What about the judgment
of the righteous? It is evident that some kind of investigation must take
place before they are permitted to enter into eternal bliss. It must be
decided whether their life and attitude warrant entrusting them with eternal
life; and this decision must be arrived at before the Lord comes to take them
home. It is no more reasonable to save the righteous and afterward have a
judgment, than to damn the wicked and afterward place them before the
bar. But there is one difference. The wicked are not destroyed
until the end of the thousand years. Rev.20:4,5. That gives abundant time to judge them after the Lord comes.
But not so with the righteous. If they are to be judged at all, if any
reward is to be meted out to them, their cases must be decided before the Lord
comes. When He comes, His reward is with Him. Rev.22:12. Hence their status must be determined
beforehand.
Some have objected
to this teaching. They do not believe that there will be a judgment of
the righteous before the Lord comes. Yet this seems only
consistent. The cases of the righteous must be settled before the Lord
comes -- else how can it be known who is to be saved? If the objection be
to the phrase "investigative judgment" which has been used,
let another which is better be found. We are willing. It is not an
executive judgment. The Bible calls it the "hour of
judgment" as contrasted with the "day of judgment." Rev.14:7; Acts
17:31. We believe "investigative
judgment" best fits the case in regard to the judgment of the righteous.
It seems eminently
fitting that when the question of who are to be saved comes up, the angels
should be present both to give their testimony and to follow the proceedings. Dan.7:9,10. They have been vitally concerned in
our welfare; they have been ministering spirits. We are to associate and
be with them, and they have a right to know who are to be admitted to the
celestial abodes. This also is God's plan. The angels have
experienced some of the results of sin. They have seen Lucifer apostatize.
They have seen millions of angels go with him. They have seen the Saviour
suffer and die, and they know the misery which sin has caused. They are
vitally interested in knowing who are to have eternal life. They have no
intention of repeating the experience with sin through which they have
gone. It is therefore God's wise plan that they have a part in the
proceedings.
The Day of Atonement
is a fit type of the day of judgment. It would be well for the reader to
review the chapter on the Day of Atonement in the light of the present
discussion. On that day there was a separation between the righteous and
the wicked. The decision hinged entirely on who had confessed their sins
and who had not. Those who had brought their offerings and complied with the
ritual had their sins blotted out. The others were "cut
off."
We do not know of
any record being kept in the sanctuary on earth as to who appeared during the
year with a sacrifice. While possible, it is hardly likely that such a
record was kept. We do know, however, that the sprinkled blood in itself
constituted a record. God had commanded sacrifices to be brought.
We believe He respected His own command and took notice of those who served Him
in truth and uprightness. In His book they were recorded as
faithful.
Of the judgment of
the last day this is written: "Whosoever was not found written in the
book of life was cast into the lake of fire." Rev.20:15. This text speaks definitely of the
book of life, and says in effect that only those whose names are found in it
are saved. Note the reading: "Whosoever was not found written in
the book of life." This means an examination of the book to find
which names are there recorded. "Whosoever was not found."
What is this but an investigation? It is as though the command were given: "See
if this name is found in the book." The report comes back, "I
have found it," or, "I have not found it."
Either report indicates an investigation. The expression, "Whosoever
was not found," justifies the contention that there is a looking
through of the record, resulting in a separation for salvation or
condemnation.
It seems so clear
that there ought to be and must be an investigation of the record kept in
heaven before the Lord comes, that the wonder is that any can seriously or
honestly doubt it. It is true that God could in a moment, should He so
desire, settle all questions as to the future destiny of every one. With
unerring accuracy He could consign one portion of mankind to be damned and
another to be saved. But God could not do this and at the same time allow
angels and men to have a part in the judgment. And this is vital.
God must place every safeguard around the future existence. Men must,
from their own investigation, be assured as to the justice of the punishment
meted out. Angels who have been ministering spirits, must be present when
the saints are judged. For this reason books are kept. For this
reason millions of angels are present at the judgment. Dan.7:10. God takes every step needed to make
the future safe. Heaven and earth must be protected. God will not
suddenly admit millions of human beings to the bliss of heaven and the
privilege of eternal life without consulting the angels.
We say this
reverently. The angels have passed through some sad experiences because
of sin. They have seen millions of their fellow angels lost. They
have seen Christ die on the cross. They have known some of the sorrow of
the Father because of sin. And should they not be interested in the
question of the admittance of millions of redeemed sinners to eternal life?
Should they not have some assurance that admitting men to heaven does not mean
admitting sin? We speak after the manner of men. We believe they should
have such assurance. And we believe that God gives it to them. They
are present when the cases of the righteous are decided. As the saints
have part in the judgment of the wicked, so the angels have part in the
judgment of the righteous. This constitutes an assurance for the future.
No question ever will or ever can arise in the mind of any one. God has
seen to that.
During the thousand
years the angels will have an opportunity to become better acquainted with us
and we with them. We will work together with them in the judgment.
During that time both men and angels will be judged. We will have a part
in the judgment. The angels will have a part. Men and angels have
fellow creatures who will be lost and in whom they are interested. God
safeguards all interests so that sin will not arise the second time. The
angels have kept the record. What is written in the books is their
writing. Shall they have no part in the examination of the record when
final decisions are made? They will have a part in the execution of the judgment.
Rev.20:1-3;
18:21; Eze.9:1-11. At its
conclusion they will give their testimony as to the justice of the decisions
made. Rev.16:5,7. This
they can do because they know the factors involved.
"The Father
loveth the Son, and hath given all things into His hands." John 3:35. We may
not be sure why the Father has given all things into the hands of the Son, but
the statement occurs so many times that it is clear God wants us to know
it. In addition to the statement quoted above, note the following: "Thou
hast put all things in subjection under His feet." Heb.2:8. "All things are delivered unto Me of My
Father." Matt.11:27;
Luke 10:22. "Thou hast
given Him power over all flesh." John 17:2. This power includes that of
judging. "The Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all
judgment unto the Son." John 5:22. Christ is "ordained of God to be the Judge
of quick and dead." Acts 10:42. God will "judge the world in
righteousness by that Man whom He hath ordained." Acts 17:31. This includes the execution of the judgment, for
the Father "hath given Him authority to execute judgment also, because
He is the Son of man." John 5:27. In fact, this granting of authority to the Son
may all be summed up in the sweeping statement of Christ Himself: "All
power is given unto Me in heaven and in earth." Matt.28:18. This leaves no doubt as to the extent
of the power given Him. It is all power in heaven and earth.
These statements
become very interesting in view of their wording. The Father had all
these powers, but for some reason He bequeathed them to the Son. Notice
how God has "given," "put," "delivered,"
"committed," "given authority to," "ordained"
His Son. All that the Father had, He gave to the Son. God at some
time in the past put all things under Christ, told Him to reign, to execute
judgment, and gave Him all power in heaven and earth.
The whole
controversy reveals a trait in the character of God that is most
comforting. God could have treated the rebels differently. He would
not need to have heeded the charges placed against Him by Satan. But he
submitted His case to be decided upon the basis of the evidence
presented. He could afford to wait and let created beings decide for
themselves. He knew that His case was just and that it could stand
investigation. He was eminently fair and just in all respects.
This gives us ground
for believing that the judgment to come will be conducted along lines that will
measure up to the highest conceptions of justice and right, not to say mercy.
God is not revengeful. He is not waiting for an opportunity to "pay
back." He wills that all men be saved and come to
repentance. He takes no delight in the death of the wicked. There
are some things, however, that God cannot do. He would be happy to save
all, but it would not be best to do so. For this there are several
reasons. Many do not wish to be saved on the terms that alone can ensure
life. The rules which God has laid down for our guidance are the rules of
life, and not arbitrary decrees. Society cannot exist, either here or in
heaven, if men do not stop killing one another. That seems so very
evident that no one will attempt to dispute it.
Killing has its root
in hatred. It would not be safe to permit one who hates his brother--or
who hates any one--to live in heaven with others. To expect peace and
harmony under such conditions would be folly. Men have abundantly
demonstrated that hatred leads to murder. It needs no more
demonstration. If God expects to have a peaceful heaven, He must exclude
murderers. That means He must exclude all who hate.
But it means
more. Love is the only effective antidote for hate. Only he who
loves is safe. Absence of love means hatred sooner or later. Hence,
love becomes one of the laws of life. Only he who loves complies with the
law, hence only he has the right to live. That right should not be
jeopardized by permitting hatred to flourish. Those who cherish hatred in
their lives, violate the law of life. It would not be safe to save such,
even should they want to be saved. There must be no murderers in heaven,
no violators of the commandment which says, "Thou shalt not kill."
The same argument holds true with respect to all the other commandments.
When God therefore
admits men and angels to sit in judgment, He does more than merely take them
into partnership. This is important. For the sake of the future it
is necessary. We need the assurance that a personal part in the judgment
will give us. But more is involved. When God admits saints and
angels to a part in the judgment, they are in reality passing upon God's
work. The rules, the principles, the laws governing men and angels, come
under scrutiny. In a certain sense God is being judged. Rom.3:4.
In the light of
these statements, the fact that men and angels at the end of the controversy
express their belief in the justice and righteousness of God, takes on added
significance. The great question always has been: Is God just, or are
Satan's accusations true? At the end of the controversy, the angel of the
waters says, "Thou art righteous, O Lord." Another angel
says, "Even so, Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are Thy
judgments." "Much people in heaven" say, "Alleluia;
salvation and glory, and honor, and power, unto the Lord our God; for true and
righteous are His judgments." Those who have been victorious
over the beast and the image say, "Just and true are Thy ways, Thou
King of saints." And as God resumes the throne, "a great
multitude" "as the voice of mighty thunderings"
shout, "Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth."
But God does not wish to reign alone. When "the kingdoms of this
world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of His Christ," when
the accuser is finally cast down, then the throne of God and the Lamb shall be
set up. Glorious consummation of our hope! (Rev.16:5,7; 19:1; 15:3; 19:6; 11:15;
12:10; 22:5)