Tag Archives: sacrifice

TABERNACLE STUDIES: Introduction

AN INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF THE TABERNACLE

In His goodness God has given to us the interpretation of the meaning of the tabernacle, and it is recorded for us in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Having spoken in chapter 8 of the New Covenant which replaces the Old Covenant of the Law, the writer goes on to show in Hebrews 9 that just as the first covenant had a sanctuary and service, so does the New Covenant. The tabernacle was a worldly sanctuary, verse 1, not in the carnal sense of worldly, but in the sense that it was:
1. Constructed of materials from this world.
2. A structure fitted for travelling through this world.
3. An ordered and beautiful structure. Just as the cosmos or universe has order and structure, so this worldly (kosmikos) building is the same.

We should notice the words used of the tabernacle which give clues as to its meaning:
The example of heavenly things Hebrews 8:5 “The example…of heavenly things”. Hebrews 9:23 “The patterns of things in the heavens”. Example and pattern translate the same word. The priests served in an earthly sanctuary, but they did so in relation to the sanctuary in heaven. The earthly tabernacle was a sample of what was in heaven, but the heavenly things were the reality behind them, “the heavenly things themselves”, Hebrews 9:23.

The evidence of heavenly things Hebrews 8:5 “The shadow of heavenly things”. The heavenly things were the substance, something that can cast a shadow, whereas the tabernacle was the shadow. It provided evidence that there was a heavenly reality.

The expression of heavenly things Hebrews 8:5 “The pattern showed to thee in the mount”. The heavenly sanctuary was the pattern, (tupos), see 9:24 below. “Tupos” is a metal-worker’s word, coming from the word to strike, and means the original, archetypal pattern, which when impressed onto softer metal leaves its corresponding mark, the anti-type. Hebrews 9:24 “The holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true”. The word figure, (anti-tupos) is the reverse of the word used in Hebrews 8:5. The heavenly sanctuary is the type, whereas the tabernacle on earth is the anti-type.

The explanation of heavenly things Hebrews 9:8 “The Holy Spirit this signifying”. The tabernacle set-up was a sign that the Holy Spirit used in Old Testament times to point the way to spiritual truths. Hebrews 9:9 “Which was figure for the time then present”. Just as the Lord Jesus in His parables used objects to represent truths, and just as He performed miracles that were called signs, so it is with the figure, (parabole) and sign of the tabernacle. The Holy Spirit used the tabernacle and its arrangement to convey spiritual truth in Old Testament times.

It is interesting to note that the materials for the making of the tabernacle are called a heave offering in Exodus 25:2, for they represented a recognition of the God of heaven, the words heave and heaven being connected. The Lord Jesus said to Nicodemus, “If I have told you earthly things and ye believe not, how will ye believe if I tell you of heavenly things?” John 3:12. There were things beyond the earthly kingdom of Messiah that Nicodemus knew nothing about. Moreover, he was not yet in a condition to receive those heavenly truths. The woman of Samaria was different, however, for she had repented and believed, and the Lord was able to unfold somewhat of heavenly things to her, John 4:21-24. She learnt that true worship was in spirit and truth, and not confined to any earthly location. That it was as Father God’s people would worship Him, and they would do so in Spirit, and they would not need material things to help them. This was a dramatic change, for God had ordained both tabernacle and temple should be built, yet now Christ is saying that there is an hour coming when such things will be obsolete.

Solomon even hinted at this at the consecration of his temple, for he admitted, speaking of God, that “the heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain Thee, how much less this house that I have builded.” And Stephen alluded to those words in his defence before the Sanhedrin, who had accused him of speaking blasphemous words against the temple, Acts 6:13. He said, “the Most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands”, Acts 7:48. He supported his statement with a quotation from Isaiah 66:1, “Heaven is My throne, and earth is My footstool: what house will ye build Me? Saith the Lord”.

They were too enraged to listen, however, but there was a young man there who did take note, even Saul. Whilst he kicked against the pricks for a while, refusing to respond to the conviction of the Spirit, he relented at last, writing to the Philippians, “we are the circumcision which worship God in the Spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh”, Philippians 3:3. The words “worship God in the Spirit” are an echo of the words of the Lord Himself in John 4.

At the present time, then, earthly temples are unnecessary. Indeed, those who build them show they have not grasped the nature of the present age, which emphasises spiritual concepts, and not physical “aids to worship”. Unbelieving men may be impressed with sacred architecture, with its soaring heights, supposedly pointing men to God, but the Christian is not deceived. The beautiful singing, the gorgeous robes and vestments, the fragrant incense, the stained-glass windows, the altars and fonts, all appeal to the natural senses, and all tell eloquently that men are in the dark as to true Christianity, and to cover their ignorance they adopt a mixture of Judaism and paganism in a futile attempt to worship God.

The Lord Jesus said, “For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John”, Matthew 11:13. Now these were the two divisions of the Old Testament, and both are said to prophesy. So the books of Moses had relevance to the future, not just in those passages such as Genesis 49 and Deuteronomy 33, but “all…the law” had something of that aspect. This is why the Lord Jesus was able, in resurrection, to expound from “all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself”, and also to say that “These are the words which I spake unto you while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning Me, Luke 24:27,44.

Now how do we know that “the things concerning Himself” extend to the tabernacle system? Three Scriptures help us to decide. First, in Hebrews 10:20 we are expressly told that the veil is Christ’s flesh. So the writer to the Hebrews is teaching us to see significance in a curtain hanging in the tabernacle of old; and moreover, to see it as a symbol of Christ’s flesh. We shall enquire later as to what that means, but it suffices for now to note the principle.
Second, we turn to John’s Gospel. A reading of that gospel will tell us that, as he writes, John is linking with the Old Testament by his references to Old Testament feasts and practices, and showing that Christ is the fulfilment of them. His whole gospel is structured around three celebrations of the Feast of Passover, and we find the Lord Jesus in Jerusalem, the centre of the religious life of Israel, more than in any other gospel. (In fact, despite the fact that Jerusalem is the city of the great king, and Matthew presents Christ as rightful king, he does not speak of Him as being in Jerusalem until He goes there to die). It is no surprise to find that early on his gospel, after his eighteen-verse prologue, John tells of John the Baptist, son of a priest and therefore a Levite, announcing the Lord Jesus as the Lamb of God, John 1:29. No surprise, either, to find Him purging the temple of the oxen and sheep and doves that had been brought for sacrifice. He is reinforcing what John the Baptist implied in his announcement, and presenting Himself as the true sacrifice. He is in fact saying, in the language of Psalm 40:6,7, “Burnt offering and sin offering thou hast not required. Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of Me, to do Thy will O God”. Words applied to the Lord Jesus in Hebrews 10:5-9.
Third, having seen that both a curtain in the tabernacle, and animal sacrifices offered outside at the altar, “prophesied” of Christ, we are prepared for John’s statement, “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us”, John 1:14. Having been active behind the scenes in Old Testament times, He now manifests Himself. But notice the interesting word John uses for “dwelt”. It means, literally rendered, “pitched His tent”. But this is exactly what God did in Israel, for He said to Moses, “Let them make Me a sanctuary; that I may dwell among them”, Exodus 25:8. And the word for dwell used there is “shaken”, meaning “to tabernacle”. Not only does the Lord express His desire to dwell amongst Israel as He gives directions for the building of the tabernacle, but He repeats this in connection with the continual burnt offering to be offered on the altar, Exodus 29:42-46. It is in the atmosphere of the sweet savour of the burnt offering that God is pleased to dwell amongst His people.

How significant, then, that it should be John’s gospel that should present the Lord Jesus as the fulfillment of the tabernacle system, for his gospel is “the gospel of the burnt offering”, being full of reminders of what the Burnt Offering meant to God. The burnt offering was the “ascending offering”, and not only is the ascension of the Lord Jesus mentioned three times in John’s gospel, (3:13; 6:62; 20:17), but the whole emphasis in the gospel is of One who is in communion with heaven, and desires to be back there. In fact, John does not record the actual ascension of Christ, as if, for Him, it was a foregone conclusion. What he does do is record the Lord’s word to Peter about His coming again, the implication being that He would ascend to His Father. It was in the character as the true burnt offering that the Lord Jesus dwelt amongst men, and the sweet savour of His person gave His Father the utmost satisfaction.

Before we go any further, we need to notice the exact words that are used of the heavenly sanctuary in the Epistle to the Hebrews. We read in Hebrews 8:2 that it is “the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man”. Also, in 9:11, that it is “a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building”. Let us consider these statements. First, the true tabernacle. Now the word for “true” used here is that one which means “in every respect corresponding to the name”. It is not a question of true as opposed to false, but true and substantial as opposed to that which does not fully measure up to the thing described as true. The bread that fed the Israelites in the wilderness was real bread in that it sustained their bodies, but the true bread is the fulness of that reality the manna only hinted at, John 6:32. The Lord gave a long discourse explaining that meaning, and thus showed that the manna was real, but it was also a symbol of the higher reality that is only found in the Son of God.

Second, we will consider the words “not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building”. Notice that we are expected to draw conclusions from the fact that it is not made with hands, for “not made with hands” is as much as to say, “not of this building”; the one is implied in the other. The word for building has the sense of “what is made or created”. It is used in Hebrews 3:4, where we read, “He who built all things is God”. Now creation is made up of three components, time, space and matter. We see this in the very first verse of the Bible. “In the beginning”, (time-word, telling us that this is when time began), God created the heaven and the earth, (matter plus space between the two). So when we are told that the true tabernacle in heaven is not of this creation, we learn that it is not limited by time, and therefore is eternal; is not limited by space, and therefore is infinite; is not limited by the physical constraints of the material, and therefore is spiritual in character. We learn also about this tabernacle that the Lord pitched it, and not man.

Why are we assured it is not pitched by man. Is this not obvious if it is in heaven? The point is that the tabernacle on earth was pitched by man, and this tabernacle is in direct contrast. Because the tabernacle in the wilderness was made by man, it was tainted, and had to be sprinkled with blood before it could be operative, Hebrews 9:21. So we can be confident that this heavenly tabernacle, not having anything of man about it, is totally pure at the outset.

What of the word “pitched”? It is a word which emphasises the pegging down of a tent. This sanctuary is fixed, then, as opposed to the tabernacle in the wilderness which was moved many times until the land was reached. Whatever this tabernacle is shall never be developed into something else; it is permanent. Does the past tense in the verb “pitched” imply that it happened at some point in past time? That cannot be, for we have seen that the true tabernacle is not part of this creation governed by time. It is eternally pitched, then. There is no point when it was not there. We are told about Christ as the Lamb that He was “foreordained before the foundation of the world”, 1 Peter 1:20. Does this mean that at some point in eternity He was ordained the lamb, whereas before He was not? Surely not, for this foreordination is part of God’s eternal purpose, and therefore has ever been.

But we still have not decided what this sanctuary actually is. To help us find out, we can summarize what we have learnt about it:
1. It is built by God.
2. It is in heaven.
3. It is the true tabernacle; not in the sense that the tabernacle on earth was false, but it did not come up to the fulness of the original, and therefore was lacking in some respects.
4. It is not of this creation, and therefore is not limited by time, space, or physical constraints.
5. It is pitched, in the sense that it is immoveable and permanent.
6. It can be described as “heaven itself”, as opposed to heaven in sign-form, as the tabernacle on earth was.
Consider these Scriptures: First, 1 Timothy 6:16, which describes Christ as “dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto”. In other words, in the light of God’s presence. This is the environment in which He dwells. Now no created light could be meant here, so it must mean the light of His own glory. And with this 1 John 1:5 agrees, which says that God is “in the light”. Second, in Colossians 3:3 the apostle reminds the Colossian believers that they have died, and yet “their life is hid with Christ in God”. So to have one’s life hid with Christ, means to have a life which is hid in God, for Christ is, in some way, in God. To be with God is to be in God. Paul is virtually saying that heaven and God are indistinguishable. That His person excludes any other consideration. Such is the glory and immensity of God, there is not room for anything else there, so it may be summed up as “God”.
Third, in Ephesians 2:1,2 we learn that as sinners we walked in trespasses and sins; our conversation was in the lusts of the flesh. Yet now, as believers, we are “seated in heavenly places in Christ”, verse 6. Now to be in sins, or to behave as those in the lusts of the flesh, or to be in Christ, are not physical locations, they are moral positions. So also is being in heavenly places. It is to be placed in an environment which is entirely heavenly in character, and has nothing of earth or sin about it whatsoever.
Fourth, perhaps the most telling statements are those of Hebrews 10:20, where we are bidden to enter into this heavenly sphere, and we are said to do so “through the veil”. Does this mean that as we enter the presence of God we have to draw aside a curtain in order to get in? Surely not, for the veil is explained as being “His flesh”. Now of course we are not to take this literally, but metaphorically. The flesh of the Lord Jesus refers not to His body, as such, but His life in the body. The writer carefully distinguishes the two in the passage, referring to Christ’s body in verse 10, but His flesh in verse 20. It is through what He was, said, and did in His body when here in the flesh that we may enter the presence of God. And the major thing He did was to yield Himself up to death, at which point His life in the flesh came to an end, and spirit, soul and body were separated.

Significantly, at that precise moment the veil in the earthly temple was rent, telling us that the focus was now on the heavenly sanctuary. So it is that, when we come through the veil, it is not a physical passage through a curtain, but a spiritual journey into God’s presence in view of what Christ was to Him on earth. It is this that gives us entrance. To this He alluded when He said to His own in the upper room, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father but by Me”, John 14:6. These words may be applied in the gospel, but they really refer to the believer coming to the Father. The Lord is coming for His own to escort them to the Father’s house, but in the meantime they may have access to the Father through Him. What He has shown Himself to be as He manifested the Father down here, is the means of access to God. We “come to the Father” as we advance in the knowledge of Himself, which knowledge is found in Christ, for as He goes on to say, “If ye had known Me, ye should have known My Father also”.

This is why He also says, “I am the truth”, for having pointed out Himself as the means of accessing the Father, He then presents Himself as the personification of truth, for all that we need to know about the Father is found in Him. Further still, He is the Life, the one who energizes this progress to the Father, (and since eternal life is to know God and Jesus Christ), the one who makes the knowledge of God a reality.

Hopefully we are now in a position to notice the significance of John’s words when he wrote, “And the word was made flesh and dwelt among us, (and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father), full of grace and truth”, John 1:14. The word for dwell means to tabernacle, or encamp. This is what God did in the wilderness, for He said, “let them make Me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them”, Exodus 25:8. The tabernacling of Christ marks a new beginning, for Herod’s temple was still standing, and the Lord even called it His Father’s house, John 2:16. Something new is beginning, and it is not earthly at all, but heavenly. But we might think that the Word tabernacling simply meant that He was here on earth in a body. For did not Peter refer to his death as putting off his tabernacle, 2 Peter 1:14? And does not Paul refer to our body as the earthly house of this tabernacle, 2 Corinthians 5:1? Whilst it is true that Christ was on earth in a real body, this is not all that is being said here. For John tells us it is the Word that was made flesh.

Even though the Word is the Son of God, (as this very verse tells us), the emphasis is not on a person becoming flesh, but on the Word doing so. Now both an individual word, and a plurality of words in a statement, are the expression of a mind. We know what a person is thinking if he expresses it in words. And the whole statement, whether long or short, is a word. We see this illustrated in John 5:24 where the Lord Jesus speaks of those who hear His word. He is not referring there to a single word, but to the whole theme or topic of His Deity upon which He had been discoursing. So when John writes about the word being made flesh he is saying to us that the mind of God is being expressed in a person who has come into flesh and blood conditions. Since John has already told us the Word was God, then the expression such an one gives to what is in the mind of God must be perfect.

Several things happened on the Day of Atonement, and one of them was that atonement was made for the tabernacle of the congregation, “that remaineth among them in the midst of their uncleanness”, Leviticus 16:16. The word “remaineth” being the same word as rendered “dwell” in Exodus 25:8. So the tabernacle dwelt in the midst of Israel’s encampment. We easily see the counterpart that John is introducing us to, even the Word tabernacling among Israel. Now as we shall see there was a difference between the tabernacle proper, and the tabernacle or tent of the congregation, these referring to different curtains, and the second word is use in the passage in Leviticus just referred to. Nonetheless the principle remains, that the Word was found in the midst of Israel, in the same way as the tabernacle of old was found in the centre of the camp. So there are three tabernacles in Scripture, in this context. There is the tabernacle in the wilderness, there is the Word tabernacling amongst Israel, and there is the true tabernacle in heaven. We have seen that the latter is a spiritual concept, not being of this created order of things in any way. The tabernacle of Old Testament times was an anti-type of that heavenly sanctuary. But how shall we interpret it, so that we may know more about God through it? The answer is plain; it is through the second tabernacle, the Word made flesh. By learning of Him, as symbolically illustrated in the Old Testament building, and also noting what He said in His ministry as He unfolded the mind of God, we discern the glory of God. For John goes on to speak of glory.

In the tabernacle of old, the glory of God was separate from the building. Now, the glory of God is seen in a person, and that person the Son of God. John writes, “and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the Only begotten of the Father, John 1:14. Because to be the Son of God means to be equal with God, John 10:30,33,37, then the Son is fully able to unfold the mind of God. He is in eternal relationship with God the Father as His Son, sharing His nature in every particular, and is therefore uniquely qualified. So when John and his fellow-apostles saw the glory of the Son, they saw the glory of God.

We should remember that the tabernacle in the wilderness, whilst meaningful and real, did not present the fulness of that which is found in the True Tabernacle in heaven. This is not the case with Christ, however, as we see from the following:
(a) In the wilderness, God and the tabernacle were separate, and He dwelt in it. The Word, (who is God, John 1:1) dwells amongst men as the realisation of tabernacle symbolism, and is Himself the tabernacle.
(b) The glory of God was separate from the tabernacle, but the glory of Christ is manifest in His Person, and His glory is the glory of God, 2 Corinthians 4:6.
(c) Moses was not able to see the glory, but John could say, “we beheld His glory”. Having seen that the tabernacle on earth was a copy of things pertaining in heaven, we are in a position to consider the way different parts of the whole tabernacle system relate to this. Consider the following general suggestions as to their significance: “The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us” and “the veil , which is to say His flesh”, encourage us to see in the tabernacle and the veil symbols of the Word as He told out the mind of God.

Taking the foregoing into account, we may summarise the significance of the tabernacle as follows:

The tabernacle, tent, covering for the tent, and the covering overall: Features of the character of Christ as seen in varying measure according to the degree of a person’s interest in Him.
The boards for the tabernacle: the support the God-hood and manhood of Christ gave to the display of His character. His steadfastness in the face of the opposition in the world.
The court of the tabernacle: the righteous life of Christ, showing the standard of righteousness God requires of those who approach Him, but which is unattainable by the natural man.
The gate of the court: righteousness maintained, but the blue, purple and scarlet are added, representing those things which fit Christ to be the mediator, the way to God.
The altar of burnt offering and the laver: two aspects of the work of Christ at Calvary, His sacrificial work and His sanctifying work, Ephesians 5:1,2; Titus 2:14.
The unseen vessels in the Holy Place and Holy of Holies: the different ministries of Christ which He currently exercises in the presence of God, but of which He gave glimpses when He was here on earth. These ministries may be summed up in the words of Hebrews 9:24, “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”.
The transportation of the vessels through the wilderness: the ways in which Christ moved amongst men so that they could have opportunities to uncover His glory, and also give opportunity for His people to serve Him by shouldering responsibility.

NUMBERS 19 The Red Heifer

Leave a reply

There were at least four once-for-all national sacrifices for Israel in the Old Testament. There was the sacrifice of the Passover Lamb, by which they were delivered from Egypt, and which became an annual festival, but only as a memorial of the original deliverance; the covenant sacrifices in Exodus 19 and 24; the sacrifice of a sucking lamb by Samuel in 1 Samuel 7:9-11, and the sacrifice of the red heifer which concerns us now. This in no way slights the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ, for the others mentioned were but typical, whereas His was substantial, the reality of which the others were but shadows. The writer to the Hebrews impresses this upon us when he alludes to the red heifer in the words of Hebrews 9:13, “For 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?” Note the link between the blood of bulls and goats of the Day of Atonement ceremony, (as compared to the blood of goats and calves of the Day of the Covenant ceremony, Hebrews 9:12, Exodus 19), and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling the unclean. In physical terms it was water that was sprinkled in Numbers 19, but the writer to the Hebrews is concerned with that which underlay and gave value to the water, namely the ashes of an accepted sin offering. The ineffectiveness in a final sense of the Day of Atonement sacrifices is seen in the fact that they were offered year by year continually; that they were retrospective, dealing with the sins of the nation after the event; and that they only purified externally and ritually, “the purifying of the flesh”, whereas the blood of Christ reaches deep within, to “purge the conscience”. In the intervening period until the next national atonement day, there was provision for defilement as it occurred, in the form of the red heifer offering to which we now turn. Notice first of all the setting in which the offering is detailed. Remarkably, it is found in the book of Numbers, the wilderness book. There were three classes of people banished from the camp of Israel, namely, lepers and those with an issue of blood, whose case is dealt with in the book of Leviticus, in chapters 13,14, and 15, and those defiled by the dead. The latter class is dealt with in the wilderness book, the Book of Numbers. The Jews gave titles to the books culled from the first words, and so they entitled the third book of Moses, “In the wilderness”. Whereas Exodus chapters 12-40 cover only 18 months, and the book of Leviticus only 1 month, Numbers covers 38 years 9 months of the movement of Israel through the desert, see 10:11 and Deuteronomy 1:3. The reason for the long length of time spent in the wilderness, (even though the journey from Horeb to Kadesh Barnea should only have taken eleven days, Deuteronomy 1:2), was that in chapter 14 they had refused the land of promise after the spies had viewed it for forty days, so they were condemned to spend a total of forty years in the wilderness. Psalm 95 is based on that period, and is quoted by the writer to the Hebrews in his second warning passage in chapters three and four. His phrase is, “Their carcases fell in the wilderness”, 3:17. All who were twenty years old and upward at the beginning of the wilderness journey were condemned to die in the desert because of their refusal of the land. Only Joshua and Caleb, the two faithful spies, were excepted. So it was that the wilderness became a vast graveyard, full of the bones and corpses of dead apostate Israelites. It is this situation that is addressed in the chapter before us, because the special need was for cleansing after contact with death in some form. With these things in mind, we turn to the detail of Numbers chapter 19. The chapter may be looked at from five viewpoints, medically, morally, typically, spiritually, and prophetically. First, medically, because the presence of so many dead bodies presented a health risk, especially to a tented multitude in hot desert conditions. Second, there was the moral lesson being taught the younger generation, as they were constantly reminded of the penalty for not listening to the voice of the Lord, see Numbers 14:22; Hebrews 3:7,8. Third, there is the typical application of the chapter, which we are encouraged to make by the reference in Hebrews 9:13. Fourth, there is the spiritual application, which we may make as we apply the lessons to ourselves in our own day. Then there is the prophetical view, for the ashes of the heifer are “laid up for the children of Israel”, so that however long the interval between the sacrifice and the realisation of defilement, the remedy is available. The nation of Israel in a day to come will find that the work of Christ at Calvary, done so many centuries before, still avails to cleanse the defiled, see Ezekiel 36:16-29. We may divide the chapter as follows:

Verses 1 and 2	The selection of the heifer.
Verses 3-8	The sacrifice of the heifer.
Verses 9-10	The saving of the ashes of the heifer.
Verses 11-16	The specifying of the uncleanness to be dealt with by the ashes of the heifer.
Verses 17-22	The sprinkling of the Israelite with the ashes of the heifer.

THE WORDS OF THE BIBLE, THE CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURES, AS FOUND IN THE BOOK OF NUMBERS CHAPTER 19, VERSES 1 TO 10:

19:1 And the Lord spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying,
19:2 This is the ordinance of the law which the Lord hath commanded, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, that they bring thee a red heifer without spot, wherein is no blemish, and upon which never came yoke:
19:3 And ye shall give her unto Eleazar the priest, that he may bring her forth without the camp, and one shall slay her before his face: 19:4 And Eleazar the priest shall take of her blood with his finger, and sprinkle of her blood directly before the tabernacle of the congregation seven times:
19:5 And one shall burn the heifer in his sight; her skin, and her flesh, and her blood, with her dung, shall he burn:
19:6 And the priest shall take cedar wood, and hyssop, and scarlet, and cast it into the midst of the burning of the heifer.
19:7 Then the priest shall wash his clothes, and he shall bathe his flesh in water, and afterward he shall come into the camp, and the priest shall be unclean until the even.
19:8 And he that burneth her shall wash his clothes in water, and bathe his flesh in water, and shall be unclean until the even.
19:9 And a man that is clean shall gather up the ashes of the heifer, and lay them up without the camp in a clean place, and it shall be kept for the congregation of the children of Israel for a water of separation: it is a purification for sin.
19:10 And he that gathereth the ashes of the heifer shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the even: and it shall be unto the children of Israel, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among them, for a statute for ever.

Verses 1 and 2 THE SELECTION OF THE HEIFER
And the Lord spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying, This is the ordinance of the law which the Lord hath commanded, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, that they bring thee a red heifer without spot, wherein is no blemish, and upon which never came yoke:

We notice in verse 1 that a word comes to Moses and Aaron as those who receive instruction from God, and then the heifer is brought to them in recognition of that fact by the people. The latter learn by this to recognise and respond to the word of God, in contrast to the older generation that refused the word of God. It is Aaron’s son Eleazar who officiates in the ceremony, however, and Moses and Aaron are not mentioned again in the chapter. We are reminded of the fact that neither Moses nor Aaron entered the land of promise, although for a different reason than the majority of Israel. They both failed to fully comply with the word of God in the matter of the water from the rock in chapter 20, and hence were barred from the land, 20:12. How serious is the refusal to hear the word of God! Let us take note, and if necessary take action.

We come now to the description of the animal that God specified in this instance. A red heifer is required. Significantly, the word for red is the same as the word for Adam. The first man Adam had been formed by God as a potter forms the red clay, Genesis 2:7. Not only is Adam a proper name, but it is a race-name too, for all descend from the first man. (Unbelievers speak of different races of men, but there is but one according to Scripture, see Acts 17:26). In Romans 5 the apostle traces the entrance of death into the world to one man, Adam. By failing to obey the word of God, sin came into the world. It is not simply that sin was now present upon the earth, but that Adam passed on the sin-principle to his offspring, so that death passes upon the world of men by reason of their birth. This would have been forcibly brought home to the Israelites as they made their way to Canaan, for the desert was strewn with the carcases of apostates, who had gone back on their commitment to God so far as to refuse the land He had promised to their forefathers. Hence the warning given by the writer to the Hebrews, lest there be found amongst them any with an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God. Notice the emphasis on the fact that He is the living God, in contrast to those who were spiritually dead despite their profession, and then physically dead also. An “Adam-heifer” is thus required by God to deal with the consequences of death in the desert.

We may see in this a foreshadowing of what Christ would do when He died, for Romans 6:6 says that our old man was crucified with Christ, indicating that in His death the Lord Jesus took account of what we were in Adam, and dealt with it. The particular need in Numbers 19, however, is for a clearing from uncleanness of those who unwittingly have come across the consequences of apostasy in others. And the lesson is not hard to draw in our day. We as believers are surrounded by those who make religious profession of some degree or other. It is manifest that with some there is a full-scale renunciation of that which is properly Christian, and true believers need to clear themselves of any trace of contamination from such a source. We need to make sure that it is well-known that assembly believers have no sympathy with corrupt Christendom. Only so shall the Lord’s people be free from guilt by association. Remember the words of 2 Corinthians 6:17, “Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing.”

The animal required is a female, however, introducing the passive thought. The man who became unclean by touching a dead body or a bone, did not actively set out to touch the unclean item; he was passive in the matter. Nevertheless he constituted a health risk to his fellow Israelites. The gravity with which God viewed the presence of death in the camp of Israel must be emphasised, especially if it came because of apostasy, which He hates. Adam in the garden was only required to be passive to obey God. He was simply commanded to refrain from eating of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Alas! he was active, and deliberately transgressed in full knowledge of what he was doing. The last Adam was marked by passive subjection to His Father’s will, “Not My will, but Thine be done”, and this subjection led Him to accomplish the act of righteousness of dealing with our sin at Calvary which directly countered the sin of Adam, Romans 5:19. There was not a shred of that independence and self-will which marked Adam. The red heifer was to be without spot, indicating there was no flaw by descent in the animal. There is no flaw by descent in Christ, either. He has no physical link with Adam through Joseph, although he, importantly, was His legal father, giving Him the direct line of descent from David and Abraham.

It is interesting to note the change of wording in Matthew 1 when the birth of Christ is mentioned. From Abraham down to Joseph it was a man begetting, but then it is “Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ”. The word for born is the same as that which has been used for begat throughout the chapter. The only difference is that it is now passive- Mary was the one through whom the begetting became a possibility. Christ is the long-promised seed of the woman, and this as a result of the Holy Spirit coming upon Mary for conception, and the power of the Highest overshadowing her for protection until her child was born. That Holy Thing that was born of her was called the Son of God because He has united Deity with a holy nature, yet remains what He ever was, the Son of God. The angel insists that the Holy Thing born may still rightly be called the Son of God, for His incarnation has not taken away from His Deity. In fact it is true to say that He has added to His Deity by becoming man, for He who is ever in the form of God took upon Himself the form of a servant and was made in the likeness of men, Philippians 2:7.

Luke sees the importance of showing that this man is indeed different, so he brings in the genealogy of Christ just before He begins His public ministry, and traces it right back to Adam. Matthew gives the genealogy of Christ beginning at Abraham, and then moves forward through time, for the Messiah was the hope for the future. Luke, however, travels back in time until he reaches the first man. But it is Adam the son of God that Luke goes back to, for creatorially God is Adam’s father, just as all men are the offspring of God by creation, Acts 17:28. It is worthy of notice that the Devil does not think that this is what the title Son means when used of Christ, for his first temptation begins- “If Thou be the Son of God”. If Christ were only Son as Adam was son, then this temptation would have been pointless, for neither Adam nor any other mere man can turn a stone into bread. The Devil knew the sonship of Christ was different. Luke deliberately challenges Satan to be defeated by Christ the Second Man, where he succeeded before with the first man, and this is what happened. The manhood of Christ is not capable of sinning. He was put to the most severe testing in the wilderness by possibly the most intelligent, and certainly the most wicked created being, yet ever distanced Himself from any thought that sin was an option.

This is the truth the expression “without sin” in Hebrews 4:15 conveys. There is no spot in Christ, and He is totally free from the entail of Adam’s sin, yet He is true man, for as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He has taken part likewise of the same, Hebrews 2:14. He is fully qualified, therefore, to deal with the question of Adam’s sin by His death. He is as much a man as men of Adam’s race are, but not such as they are, in terms of their sin. Ruth found she had a kinsman in Boaz, but she also found there was one nearer than he. It was only when the nearest kinsman defaulted that the second man could act as redeemer. So Adam is nearer to us in the sense that we are sinners as he was, but since he has defaulted, and disqualified himself from acting for God, the Second Man is free to step in and become our Kinsman Redeemer.

The red heifer was to be without blemish as well, meaning that it must not have had its coat damaged in any way. This tells of the blameless character of the Lord Jesus. He was blamed for many things, but the three-fold word of the Father from heaven to Him publicly, assures us He was well pleasing to heaven, even though earth found fault. It is expressly said of the majority of Israel as they passed through the wilderness, that with them God was not well-pleased, for they were overthrown in the wilderness, 1 Corinthians 10:5. Their behaviour left much to be desired, and it is no surprise that they were cut off. The Son of God, in marked contrast, passed through this wilderness world blemish free, for He was “holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens”, Hebrews 7:26. There is a further description of the red heifer.

It must never have had a yoke upon it. Peter spoke of the yoke in Acts 15:10 when he rebuked the Judaisers for wanting to put believers under the law. He protested, saying, “Why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear”. Just as a yoke was put upon an ox to force it to do the will of its master, so Israel were yoked to the law to make them do the will of God. Now Christ was made under the law, was circumcised the eighth day to signify this, and He magnified the law and made it honourable as Isaiah said He would, Isaiah 42:21. Yet for all that He did not need the coercion of the law to do the will of His Father. It is noticeable that when speaking of doing the will of God in Hebrews 10, the writer, relating Psalm 40 to Christ, omits the words “Yea, thy law is within My heart”. Like the ark in the tabernacle, which contained within it the unbroken tables of the law, Christ faithfully safeguarded all the commandments of the law. Yet whereas the law was given through Moses, grace and truth came, and are still maintained, by Jesus Christ, John 1:17.

Verses 3-8 THE SACRIFICE OF THE HEIFER

Verse 3 And ye shall give her unto Eleazar the priest, that he may bring her forth without the camp, and one shall slay her before his face:

Having been selected by the nation, the heifer is brought to Eleazar the priest. The word came to Moses and Aaron, but the work fell to Eleazar, Aaron’s son, the high priest in waiting. Eleazar is expressly spoken of in Numbers 32:29 as passing over the Jordan. He becomes a figure of Christ as one who having made sacrifice at Calvary, “crossed the Jordan” to resurrection ground, and then “passed into the heavens”, Hebrews 4:14. He is spoken of as the apostle (like Moses), and high priest, (like Aaron), of our profession, but whereas they did not enter the land, He did, (like Eleazar).

The animal is next taken outside the camp, for it was there that those defiled by the dead were sent according to Numbers 5:1-4. The sacrifice that is to be their substitute must take the same place. So Christ also made His way outside the city walls of Jerusalem to the outside place, the place of the outcast. There had been no room for Him in the inn at His birth, no room for Him in the synagogue of Nazareth, no room for Him in the temple, and now there was no room for Him in the city. He deliberately moves outside, however, that He might deal with that which causes men to be cast out from the presence of God. He was “numbered with the transgressors; and He bare the sin of many”, Isaiah 53:12. It is noteworthy that much of the action in this chapter is carried out by unnamed persons. “One shall slay her”, verse 3; “one shall burn”, verse 5; “a man that is clean shall gather up the ashes”, verse 9; “they shall take the ashes”, verse 17; “a clean person shall sprinkle”, verse 18. Since only those who were holy were allowed to touch the holy things, we must assume that these unnamed persons are Levites.

This would explain the emphasis on the Levites throughout the book up to this point. The mention of the fact that they were not numbered for war, but were to attend to the tabernacle, especially when it was moved, 1:47-51, 2:33; their ministry unto Aaron as priest, and their genealogy as those thus called, and their respective tasks when the tabernacle was transported, 3:1-4:49; their consecration to the Lord, and their substitution for the firstborn in Israel, 8:5-26; and their being joined to Aaron in the service of the tabernacle, 18:1-7, and the provision for their support in 18:21-32. Hebrews 7:28 makes it very clear that the priesthood of Christ did not begin until the law-age was finished, and this happened when He died. The fact is that the priest and Levite were needed in the Old Testament because of the deficiency of the law-system. There is no such deficiency with Christ. He does not need priesthood, either of Himself or others, to enable Him to offer the supreme and final sacrifice. He offered Himself without spot to God, doing what no animal was able to do, namely, present Himself for sacrifice.

Verse 4 And Eleazar the priest shall take of her blood with his finger, and sprinkle of her blood directly before the tabernacle of the congregation seven times:

The blood, (being the evidence that an acceptable sacrifice has been slain), is now taken, and sprinkled by Eleazar towards the face or front of the tabernacle of the congregation, seven times. It is important to remember that the tabernacle proper, the “Mishcan”, the immediate presence of God, was the innermost curtain of the building. The curtains of goats hair formed a tent, “ohel”, for this tabernacle, as Exodus 26:7 makes clear. The rams’ skins dyed red were a covering for this tent, and the badgers’ skins were a covering over all. The boards of the tabernacle were simply pillars to support the innermost curtain, the tabernacle. That they were not the tabernacle itself is seen in Numbers 3:25,36. In verse 25 the Gershonites have charge of the tabernacle. In verse 36 the Merarites have charge of the boards of the tabernacle. Not the boards consisting of the tabernacle, but the boards belonging to the tabernacle, in the sense that they were necessary to hold the tabernacle up. Returning to Numbers 19:4 where the blood is sprinkled directly before the tent of the congregation. This tent of the congregation was the goats’ hair curtains which covered the linen curtains, thus protecting them. It should be noticed where the apostrophe is placed in the words goats’, rams’ and badgers’. That it is at the end shows that more than one animal is in view in each case. Now goat’s hair can either be plucked from a living goat, or from a dead one. And both a living and a dead goat featured in the Day of Atonement ceremony. The one was sent away into the wilderness bearing its symbolic load of sin, and the other was slain and its blood sprinkled in the Holiest of All. The tent of the congregation was a reminder of this, and performed a two-fold function, for it protected the congregation, being the tent of the congregation, and it protected the linen curtains. God dwelt amongst His people only because the question of their defiling sin was dealt with each Day of Atonement, and this was signified by the protection the goats’ hair curtains provided for His dwelling-place. Now in what way could the blood of the red heifer be sprinkled towards the tent of the congregation, if it was covered over by the rams’ skins and the badgers’ skins? The answer is found in the fact that one of the sections of goats’ hair was visible at the front, being folded in half and hung over the entrance to the tabernacle. This ensured that the need for atonement was always kept in view. Every time the people looked toward the tabernacle they would be reminded of it. So the blood is sprinkled in relation to the acknowledged need for atonement.

The fact that Eleazar only used his finger shows that the emphasis at this point is on the quality of the blood. Sometimes blood was poured out, and this signified the abundance of the provision, the quantity of it, so to speak. With Christ, of course, there is both the quality, for His blood is precious to God, and abundant provision, for He tasted death for every man, Hebrews 2:9, and put away sin in its totality, Hebrews 9:26. The blood was sprinkled seven times, not only to ensure that the action was seen by the Israelites, but also to emphasise the sufficiency of what was being provided for cleansing. The Hebrew word for seven means fulness or completeness.

Verse 5 And one shall burn the heifer in his sight; her skin, and her flesh, and her blood, with her dung, shall he burn:

The next stage in the ritual is that the heifer is burned, again in the sight of Eleazar, acting for God in the matter. On a practical level, this is in fact the incineration of the animal, thus ensuring that it is completely germ-free. On a spiritual level the heifer must be burnt, for it represents that which man has become through Adam’s fall, and that merits the unsparing judgement of God. For the word for burn used here means to burn up, thus indicating God’s displeasure at death and sin.

This is in addition to the killing of the animal, and shows us in typical fashion the need, not only of the death of the Lord Jesus to set aside Adam and his race, but also of His bearing of wrath before He died, which is figured in the flames of the fire. Adam and his race are by nature children of wrath, Ephesians 2:2, yet Christ was prepared to endure wrath in Calvary’s dark night, that those who believe may be shown mercy. What is burnt up is now specified. The skin, flesh, the blood, and the dung are all totally consumed. The offering is a substitute for the man who is defiled. Being defiled, the man merits the judgement of God, and every part of him does so.

The skin of an animal is that which corresponds to the clothing of a man. Clothing in Scripture speaks of character, those features which mark him personally. We are reminded of Isaiah 64:6, “all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags”. Next the flesh of the animal, which tells of the nature, what a person is within. This too must be burnt, for the apostle states that “in me, that is in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing”, Romans 7:18. Then the blood. This forcibly presents to us a very important truth, that once this heifer has been sacrificed, there will not need to be a further sacrifice to yield blood to be sprinkled. This is the only time when sacrificial blood was burnt. This comes close to the truth of Hebrews 9, and the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ. This lesson is re-inforced in verse 6, as we shall see. Finally, the dung of the animal is burnt up. Now we may easily connect this with that which is distasteful and abhorrent about the flesh, but we must remember that the apostle counted all his attainments in the religious sphere as dung, Philippians 3:8. Anything which supplants Christ is abhorrent to God, and merits His fiery indignation.

Verse 6 And the priest shall take cedar wood, and hyssop, and scarlet, and cast it into the midst of the burning of the heifer.

Then a strange thing happened, for the priest took cedar wood, hyssop and scarlet, and cast them into the burning of the heifer. In the midst, thus ensuring that they did not escape the fire. These three items have been met with before, in Leviticus 14. Two of them are also present in Exodus 24 but not mentioned. It is not until we reach Hebrews 9:19 that we learn that when Moses sprinkled the people and the book with blood, he used scarlet wool and hyssop. Quite possibly the hyssop was tied together by the scarlet wool to make a convenient sprinkler. Certainly in Leviticus 14 the cedar wood, scarlet and hyssop were used to sprinkle the leper.

Here in Numbers 19 these items are deliberately burnt, repeating the lesson we learnt when the blood was burnt, namely that there was no need to have recourse to the sprinkling of blood again. The water of separation would be enough to deal with defilement. We know that Solomon wrote about many things, and the writer of the Book of Kings summarises them with the words, “from the cedar tree that is in Lebanon, to the hyssop that springeth out of the wall”, 1 Kings 4:33. Now the fact that the sprinkler facilitated the sprinkling of the leper, and ensured that he was rendered fit to be re-instated in Israel, would suggest to us that there is something about Christ in these three things, for He alone makes the restoration of the sinner a possibility. Is He not like the cedar? and did He not become like the hyssop? And was it not our sins, which were as scarlet, Isaiah 1:18 that which caused He who was like the cedar tree to become like the hyssop? And is it not true that as a result of His work, our sins, which were as scarlet, have become as white as wool? In other words, have been completely removed? We rejoice that these things are so.

The cedar tree is that strong, majestic, storm-defying tree which clothes and crowns the slopes, whose excellent wood Solomon used to line his temple. How fitting a symbol of Christ, who being in the form of God, can justly have applied to Him the language of Isaiah 57:15, “that high and lofty one that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is holy”. What Divine strength and majesty marks Him! How futile the attempts of men and Satan to uproot Him! But He who possessed the form of God eternally, added to Himself the form of a servant. He did this by being made in the likeness of men. Not content with this, having been found by men as one who was in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself still further in His obedience to His Father. The extent of that obedience is seen in that He endured a cross-death, with all its shame.

As He made His way outside the city walls of Jerusalem, what was springing out of those walls? The hyssop of which His ancestor had spoken long before. Hyssop, the lowly shrub, yielding its bitterness through bruising- fit symbol of Him who was bruised for our iniquities in Calvary’s low place. Just as the burning of the cedar wood, hyssop and scarlet added to the burning of the heifer, so the features of Christ they symbolised added value to His sacrifice.

There is an important principle to be noticed in connection with the burning of the cedar wood, scarlet, and hyssop, and it is this. Once a person has truly known cleansing from sin through the blood of Christ, there is no need for that process to be repeated. Just as the work of Christ was once for all, so the cleansing is once for all. The apostle John emphasises this when he speaks of true believers walking in the light, just as Israel walked in the light of the pillar of fire, the priests walked in the light of the lampstand in the Holy Place, and the High Priest walked in the light of the Shekinah glory in the Holiest of All. But on what basis? For Israel, it was the blood of atonement; for believers it is the blood of Jesus Christ, God’s Son, “which cleanseth us from all sin”. Only because the blood of Christ has this character can we move in the light of God’s presence.

The blood is not constantly applied, but it is constantly effective in God’s mind, and His people are maintained before Him, despite the fact that they are still in the old body, and often fail. As we shall see, even though there has been the once-for-all cancellation of sin’s guilt, there still needs to be the day-by-day cleansing from sin’s defilement.

Verses 7 and 8 Then the priest shall wash his clothes, and he shall bathe his flesh in water, and afterward he shall come into the camp, and the priest shall be unclean until the even. And he that burneth shall wash his clothes in water, and bathe his flesh in water, and shall be unclean until the even.

This is a startling thing, that even the priest was rendered unclean by the ritual. At the medical level, we can understand that simply going outside the camp puts the priest in danger himself. He must therefore take steps to cleanse himself from defilement. He does not need to have the ashes sprinkled upon him however, since he has not touched a primary source of infection. It must be said, however, that when the leper was dealt with in Leviticus 13 and 14, the priest went outside the camp, but is not said to need to wash his clothes, or bathe, and be unclean until even, as is the case in the chapter before us. And in the matter of those with an issue of blood, the other group which had to be excluded from the camp, the ritual took place in front of the tabernacle. This highlights for us the extreme nature of the defilement in this instance. Leprosy and haemorrhage are clearly not so infectious.

Verses 9-10 THE SAVING OF THE ASHES OF THE HEIFER

Verses 9 and 10 And a man that is clean shall gather up the ashes of the heifer, and lay them up without the camp in a clean place, and it shall be kept for the congregation of the children of Israel for a water of separation: it is a purification for sin. And he that gathereth the ashes of the heifer shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the even: and it shall be unto the children of Israel, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among them, for a statute for ever.

The ashes now claim our attention. A clean person gathers them up from where they were burnt, and lays them up in a clean place. The man and the place must both be clean, lest they infect the all-important ashes. This clean place would be a designated spot outside the camp that was protected in some way from defilement. The ashes are thus preserved for use when the need arose. We see a prophetical aspect to things here, for the reminders of the accepted sin offering of Christ, as represented by the ashes, are held in reserve by God, so that when the nation repents they may come into the good of what their Messiah did for them long ago. Then will come to pass the words of Ezekiel 36, and God will sprinkle clean water upon them and they will be clean, after the defilement contracted by being amongst the Gentiles for so long. The ashes are convincing proof that a suitable sin offering has been made. Yet the very thing that was evidence of their defilement and failure, was the provision made by God for their defilement.

The cleansing was not automatic, however. The fact that the ashes had been laid up was not enough, for they were not religious relics, but Divine provision, to be availed of when necessary. The ashes of the heifer must be sprinkled on the unclean, as Hebrews 9:13 indicates. Not the ashes alone, but water that has been brought into contact with them. Now the water was to be running water, or literally “living water”, not scooped from some stagnant pool which was likely to be defiled, but fresh water. No doubt from the rock that supplied them with water. So two opposite things are brought together, ashes, the sign of death, and living water.

This water is called the water of separation, because it separated the Israelite from his defilement when he used it. Of course, no amount of water is going to remove some deadly infection contracted by touching a putrefying dead body. So this is where the promise of God comes in, for He had pledged to not put the diseases of Egypt upon His people, provided they were obedient to His word, Exodus 15:26. The man is put to the test, therefore. He has been defiled. Will he avail himself of the Divinely-provided remedy, or will he fail to hear the voice of God, as his elders did when they refused the land? If he does fail to obey, then on the seventh day he is still unclean, and poses a risk to his fellow Israelites, and an affront to God.

THE WORDS OF THE BIBLE, THE CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURES, AS FOUND IN THE BOOK OF NUMBERS CHAPTER 19, VERSES 11 TO 22:

19:11 He that toucheth the dead body of any man shall be unclean seven days.
19:12 He shall purify himself with it on the third day, and on the seventh day he shall be clean: but if he purify not himself the third day, then the seventh day he shall not be clean.
19:13 Whosoever toucheth the dead body of any man that is dead, and purifieth not himself, defileth the tabernacle of the Lord; and that soul shall be cut off from Israel: because the water of separation was not sprinkled upon him, he shall be unclean; his uncleanness is yet upon him.
19:14 This is the law, when a man dieth in a tent: all that come into the tent, and all that is in the tent, shall be unclean seven days. 19:15 And every open vessel, which hath no covering bound upon it, is unclean.
19:16 And whosoever toucheth one that is slain with a sword in the open fields, or a dead body, or a bone of a man, or a grave, shall be unclean seven days.
19:17 And for an unclean person they shall take of the ashes of the burnt heifer of purification for sin, and running water shall be put thereto in a vessel:
19:18 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:
19:19 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.
19:20 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.
19:21 And it shall be a perpetual statute unto them, that he that sprinkleth the water of separation shall wash his clothes; and he that toucheth the water of separation shall be unclean until even. 19:22 And whatsoever the unclean person toucheth shall be unclean; and the soul that toucheth it shall be unclean until even.

Verses 11-16 THE SPECIFYING OF THE SINS TO BE DEALT WITH

Verses 11-13 He that toucheth the dead body of any man shall be unclean seven days. He shall purify himself with it on the third day, and on the seventh day he shall be clean: but if he purify not himself the third day, then the seventh day he shall not be clean. Whosoever toucheth the dead body of any man that is dead, and purifieth not himself, defileth the tabernacle of the Lord; and that soul shall be cut off from Israel: because the water of separation was not sprinkled upon him, he shall be unclean; his uncleanness is yet upon him.

We come now to the procedure to be followed. Two particular days are specified, the third day and the seventh day, with the implication that there was a first day. Presumably the first day is the day when the defiled man has been banished outside the camp. Having assessed the situation on the second day, he loses no time, if he is wise, in seeking the remedy that is laid up for him in the form of the water of separation. If he is not wise, the third day passes by, and he has refused the appeal of God in the words, “today, if ye will hear My voice, harden not your hearts”. The word “today” is referred to seven times in Hebrews 3 and 4, and reminds us that many in Israel were found to be still unclean after God had constantly appealed to them. They were unclean on the seventh day because they had not listened to His voice.

The Christian has a first day and a third day. Our first contact with Christ is at the cross. This becomes our first day, as we realise that when Christ was crucified, our old man, ourselves considered as to our links with Adam, was crucified in company with Him. Acting upon this realisation, we got ourselves baptized, so that we might be associated with Christ in His state of death in the tomb, with the question of former associations dealt with. We had a third day also, for, coming up out of the watery grave of the baptismal waters, we were associated with His resurrection, which of course took place on the third day after His crucifixion. This process has life-long implications, for we henceforth are to reckon ourselves to be dead indeed, (that is, in reality and not just in theory), unto sin, but alive unto God because of the link we have with Christ, the Last Adam.

The apostle reminds us that before we were saved we yielded our members as servants to uncleanness, and the end of those things was death, Romans 6:19,21. Sadly, it is possible for us to do the same after we have been saved. We see that this is true because the apostle has to exhort us to not yield our members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin, Romans 6:13. It is possible, then, to have uncleanness upon us as those who are “third day men”, even though in principle we have begun to walk in newness of life. This needs to be remedied, not only for our own sakes, but for the sake of others, lest they unwittingly be defiled by our uncleanness, but also, most importantly, because uncleanness not dealt with “defileth the tabernacle of the Lord”, Numbers 19:13. So it is that in 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1 the apostle appeals to the believers to not be associated with unbelievers, “What agreement hath the temple of God with idols, for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; And I will be their God, and they shall be my people”. This is a quotation from Jeremiah 31:33. Next comes a quotation from Isaiah 52:11, “Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; And I will receive you, and will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty”.

First there comes the promise of God’s presence. Next comes the condition on which this is to be known, namely separation. Then comes the personal appeal of the apostle “Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and the spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God”. The concern of the apostle is that believers in the local assembly should realise that just as defilement affected the tabernacle, the place where God dwelt amongst His earthly people, so defilement affects the dwelling-place of God today, the local assembly.

Hence the appeal of the apostle that we cleanse ourselves. There are two sorts of filthiness. That of the flesh, the defilement from base passions and lusts. That of the spirit, the defilement of things in the religious sphere that we have already thought of in connection with the burning of the dung of the animal. The apostle reminds the Corinthians, (many of whom had been idol worshippers, and some of whom, strangely, seemed still to have had contact with such things), that the temple of God can have no fellowship with idols, for that is defilement of the spirit. What if this cleansing is not done? If the first day is our first contact with Christ, then may we suggest that the seventh day is the believer’s last day upon earth, the end of his cycle of time down here. How solemn to go into eternity with these things not dealt with!

Such is the grace of God in Christ, that the work of Christ at Calvary allows God to reckon righteous all who truly believe the gospel. Judicially, all is settled, but practically, there may be things still to be dealt with at the Judgement Seat of Christ, where things done in the body, whether they are good or bad, will be brought out into the light if they have not been confessed. “Every one of us shall give account of ourselves before God”, Romans 14:12. “For we must all appear before the judgement seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad”, 2 Corinthians 5:10.

Verses 14-16 This is the law, when a man dieth in a tent: all that come into the tent, and all that is in the tent, shall be unclean seven days. And every open vessel, which hath no covering bound upon it, is unclean.And whosoever toucheth one that is slain with a sword in the open fields, or a dead body, or a bone of a man, or a grave, shall be unclean seven days.

In verses 11 and 13 there were general statements about the dead body of a man., but in verses 14-16 the details are given. There are two categories, defilement in a tent, or in the open field. First, in a tent. A man dies in a tent, and he, all that is in the tent, and all that come into the tent, are unclean for seven days. If the water of separation is used, then after the seven days there is cleansing, whether for persons or objects. The objects in a tent include vessels, no doubt containing food. If the vessel is covered, then there is no need for it to be cleansed. Second, those in the open fields, whether slain by the sword, a carcase lying on the surface, or a long-dead person, with only bones remaining, or a grave. There is increasing distance between the death occurring and the defilement being contracted. There is one whose death is so recent that its cause can be ascertained. Then one who has been dead long enough so that cause of death is uncertain. Then the carcase is so long decomposed that only bones remain, and finally, all has crumbled to dust, leaving only the grave.

The lesson is simple. No matter how distant we are from the death that caused the defilement, there is still the need to remedy it. We must not think that the passage of time deals with the matter. There is defilement amongst the professed people of God, and there is defilement from the world, for “the field is the world”, Matthew 13:38. . David had reminded the nation that the mistakes of their forbears had a lesson, “after so long a time”, Hebrews 4:7, and this also applied to the Hebrews in AD 68, many years after they, as a nation, had rejected Christ. It was some 40 years since John the Baptist had called them to prepare for the coming King and His kingdom. Those who refused his word were like those who rejected Joshua and Caleb’s word, and failed to enter into the land.

The writer to the Hebrews is anxious that the next generation should not make the same mistake. Because it was failure to listen to the voice of God that was the root of their sin in refusing the land, the writer to the Hebrews warns that “the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of Him with whom we have to do”. Notice the features of the word of God. It is quick, that is, living; it is powerful or energetic; it sharper than a two-edged sword, and it is a divider. All these things have relevance in the matter of the disobedience of Israel when they refused the land. The living word of God came to them in the form of the faithful testimony of Caleb and Joshua. The writer to the Hebrews calls this “gospel”, Hebrews 4:2. Refusal of this word resulted in death in the wilderness for them. The word of God came to them in the form of encouragement to enter the land, assuring them He had power to bring them in, despite the formidable enemies that occupied the land. They refused the powerful word of God. When they did this, they found that the word of God was like a sharp sword, and meted out judgement to them for rebelling against Him. Far from falling by a literal sword in Canaan, as they feared, Numbers 14:3, they fell by a spiritual sword in the wilderness. No wonder special mention is made of a person slain by the sword, in Numbers 19:16.

The word of God also discerns and distinguishes, dividing between that which is merely emotional, of the soul, such as national and religious pride, and that which is spiritual, which will take the form of obedience to His word. It can also distinguish between the joints and the marrow. That is, the outward part of the bone and the inward. The joint is that which facilitates outward action, whereas the marrow of the bone produces white blood cells to fight infection, red blood cells to carry oxygen, and platelets to stop bleeding, thus maintaining the life of the soul. The people were marked by inactivity when God instructed them to enter the land, and carnal activity when they went up in their own strength afterwards and were utterly defeated, Numbers 14:40-45. The word of God is able to distinguish between fleshly activity or inactivity, and the sort of exercise of heart which marked Caleb and Joshua. They trusted in the Lord with all their heart, and found that as Proverbs 3 went on to promise, it was marrow to their bones, Proverbs 3:5,8. It was not the bones of Caleb and Joshua that Israelites were defiled by as they made their way through the desert.

The word of God also discerns the thoughts and intents of the heart. It can expose the thoughts of men, and the intentions they formulate after they have had those thoughts. Again the inner and outer is in view. Hebrews 3 speaks of the evil heart of unbelief that marked those who rejected the land. Numbers 14 records how these same people had the intention to go into the land on their own initiative, with disastrous results. The word of God discerned both their thoughts, and the intents of their hearts. Not only could defilement come upon them in the open field, but it could also invade their tents. There is nothing hid from the word of God here either, for the Lord knows what happens in the tents of Israel, and they are exposed to view beneath His all-seeing eye. When death came in a tent, then all in the tent, all that came into the tent, were to be counted unclean. There is special mention of vessel which had no covering bound upon them. It is implied that that if a vessel has a covering upon it, then it is not unclean. The defilement would not have come into contact with the food in the vessel. There is here a practical lesson in hygiene for the Israelites. There is no way of knowing when death will strike, so meticulous care must be taken at all times. There is a spiritual lesson too, for the food for the household of faith should always be kept free from the defilement that is prevalent in the world, and especially in the religious world, with its lethal mix of Judaism and paganism.

Verses 17-22 THE SPRINKLING OF THE ASHES OF THE HEIFER

Verses 17-19 And for an unclean person they shall take of the ashes of the burnt heifer of purification for sin, 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.

Notice the “of”, in the expression “they shall take of the ashes of the burnt heifer of purification for sin”, so only a portion of the ashes is used, leaving the rest for another act of cleansing. There is no blood involved in this personal part of the ceremony. The blood comes to the fore when the national need is addressed. It is not here a question of guilt for sin committed, but defilement.

The counterpart to this is the first chapter of John’s first epistle, where the question of defilement comes up, with the double mention of cleansing. John is not concerned with the judicial side of things, but with the fact that walking in the light necessarily shows up defilement. So sin in that context is defilement, which hinders communion, for God can only presence Himself with those who are pure.

We come now to the sprinkling of the water of separation. The man is going to be separated from his defilement by the use of two things, namely, ashes and water. The ashes are evidence of death having taken place. Death, that is, of a suitable substitute which had no liability to death because of breeding or behaviour. The water, as we have seen, is living or running water. We have already noted that the word of God is called “quick” meaning living, in Hebrews 4:12. So this gives us the clue as to the meaning here. The people are vulnerable to defilement because the word of God had not been obeyed in the matter of entering the land. They must disassociate themselves from the attitude of their forefathers if they are to know cleansing. They do this by the use of living water, water which has no trace of defilement, for it is not from some contaminated stagnant pool, but from a running stream.

This water is applied by the use of hyssop. The materials for the sprinkling of blood have been burnt in the former part of the ceremony, but water needs to be sprinkled, so hyssop alone is used. Hyssop was one of the bitter herbs used at the Passover meal, which in that context spoke of the bitterness of their experiences as slaves in Egypt. Here it is the symbol of that repentance which befits those who have endangered the health of the camp of Israel, and more importantly, have brought into the camp that which reminds God of the disobedience of their fathers. The word of God having done its convicting work, the unclean man moves to deal with his defilement. By the application of that which speaks of an accepted sin offering, the defilement is removed by God.

There is still more personal responsibility for the man however, for he is now required to wash his clothes, bathe his flesh in water, and wait until evening to be clean. From a medical standpoint this was necessary to ensure that no trace of the germ which caused the infection still remained on either his clothes or his person, and that the water that ensured this was perfectly dried up on his skin and clothing. The spiritual application of all this is important.

When we realise we are defiled by some manifestation of sin, the word of God needs to be applied to that situation. With repentance because of our lapse, we need to have recourse to the provision God has made for this sort of situation. We are encouraged as we do so that the work of Calvary still maintains God’s people in their position before Him. Nothing can ever undermine the true believer’s position before God- it is settled for eternity. Present condition should not be confused with eternal position, however, and if we fail we must take steps to deal with the matter. The word of God for that particular failure must be applied, and in this manner the defilement is dealt with. “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness”, 1 John 1:9. We need to “wash our clothes”, also, for clothing indicates character in the Scriptures, and there needs to be a change of attitude to the things that have led us into defilement. This is vitally important, since as we have seen in the chapter, defilement in the camp directly affects the tabernacle, significantly called here the sanctuary, or Holy Place.

That is why in 2 Corinthians 6:16 the apostle reminds the believers that as an assembly they were a temple of God, and He was pleased to dwell amongst them if only they maintained separation lest they be defiled, and if they cleansed themselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit if they did become defiled. The man was also to bathe his flesh in water, so that there was an overall application of the “water of the word” to his whole person.

We need to apply the word of God to ourselves overall, for there is no part of us that should be outside of the regulation of the word of God. We are expected to yield our members as instruments of righteousness unto God, and as servants to righteousness unto holiness, Romans 6:13, 19. If we fail to do so, then we shall yield our members servants to uncleanness unto iniquity, and thereby will be in need of cleansing.

Verses 20-22 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. And it shall be a perpetual statute unto them, that he that sprinkleth the water of separation shall wash his clothes; and he that toucheth the water of separation shall be unclean until even. And whatsoever the unclean person toucheth shall be unclean; and the soul that toucheth it shall be unclean until even.

The closing verses of the chapter are intensely solemn, for they repeat what has already been stated in verses 12 and 13, namely that one who refused the remedy provided was to be cut off from Israel as being a threat to them both physically and spiritually. He was thereby put into the same position as those who had refused the land, for he too, like them, perished in the wilderness. Now true believers are eternally secure, but we must not neglect the application of this. For it is possible to let the seventh day pass, and be found in an unclean state. If the first day is our start with Christ at the cross, as we suggested in connection with verse 11, then the seventh day must represent our last day of opportunity before we either pass into eternity via death, or because the Lord comes.

How solemn to allow this deadline to pass, without recourse to the Divine provision! Indeed if we are set upon such a course, then maybe the Lord will deal with us as He dealt with some at Corinth, as 1 Corinthians 11:29-34 describes. One final point. It was, and is, a great puzzle to the rabbis in Israel, as to why ashes which dealt with defilement made the one who touched them unclean, as verse 21 says they did. Looking at this matter from the medical viewpoint, it is easy to see that if an infected person was being dealt with according to this ritual, then given the highly contagious nature of some organisms, the clean person himself might have transmitted to him the same defilement, and the organism might also infect the water of separation itself. He did not need to go through the whole ritual, because he had been acting in obedience to God, and therefore could claim the promise of Exodus 15:26. Nor did he need to worry that the water of purification was physically defiled, for it was the spiritual meaning of the water that mattered, not the actual water itself.

Believers are thankful that they have One who acts on their behalf, who sanctifies and cleanses by the washing of water by the word, Ephesians 5:26, and who washes our feet so that we may continue to have part with Him, John 13:8. He can never be defiled, for He passed through this unclean world without a spot or blemish upon Him or in Him.

HEBREWS 11:1-16

Leave a reply

HEBREWS 11:1-16

Setting of the chapter
The chapter is introduced by the last verses of chapter 10. Reference to that passage, and also Habakkuk 2 which is quoted there, will show that the prophet mentions tarrying in two senses. In one sense the (fulfilment of the) vision would tarry in the sense that it would be a long time before it came, but in another sense it would not tarry in the sense of being late. The vision in question being the sight of Christ coming in glory to judge the earth. There are two attitudes that will be adopted whilst the time of the coming of Christ is awaited. Some will be lifted up in pride, as they think that God will not judge their sin. These would correspond to the adversaries mentioned in 10:27 whom God will judge. Others will live by faith. As we might expect, there are also two reactions by God to these attitudes. Those who are proud He is displeased with; those who press forward in faith meet His approval. There are two results to these attitudes as well, there is a drawing back to perdition, and there is the believing to the salvation of the soul. Obviously the writer to the Hebrews would wish to encourage his readers to be of the second sort, and this he does by giving examples of Old Testament faith for them to imitate.

THE WORDS OF THE BIBLE, THE CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURES, AS FOUND IN THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS CHAPTER 11, VERSES 1 TO 16:

11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

11:2 For by it the elders obtained a good report.

11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

11:4 By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.

11:5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please Him: for he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him.

11:7 By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.

11:8 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.

11:9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise:

11:10 For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.

11:11 Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised.

11:12 Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as good as dead, so many as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable.

11:13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.

11:14 For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country.

11:15 And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned.

11:16 But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.

Structure of the passage

Section (a)	Verses 1 and 2	Introduction to the subject of faith
Section (b)	Verses 3-12	Faith in relation to God.
Section (c)	Verses 13-16	Comment about those of previous section.

Section (a) Verses 1-2
Introduction to the subject of faith.

11:1
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for- this is not a definition of faith, (for faith may be defined as “a firm persuasion based on the word of God”), but an assertion that the believer reaches out to lay hold of the truth that God’s word brings, (in this context, the certainty of the coming of Christ and the consequent events), and treasures it in his heart. In this way what is believed by faith becomes, in the heart, the evidence of its certainty.
So on the one hand, by faith a man is justified and is reckoned righteous by God. On the other hand, in the way things are looked at in this chapter, faith results in a good report from God.

Special note on the nature of faith
Faith is not wishful thinking. Some think that Christians believe things are true because they hope they are true. They want the things to be true so much that they persuade themselves that they are. Nothing could be more wrong. When the Bible is approached by those who have an unbiased mind and who earnestly seek the truth, then it is the promise of Christ Himself that they will be convinced. He said, “If any man will to do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself”, John 7:17. This is the best argument of all, for it does not depend upon other people convincing us by their reasoning, but the Bible self-authenticating and self-accrediting itself.

Faith is not relative. Christians do not believe the Bible because this is their personal preference. They believe it because they have been convinced it is true. Unbelievers are often prepared to allow Christians to believe the Bible, as long as they do not insist that they should do so also. But truth is not relative, so belief in the truth is not relative either.

Faith is not a substitute for evidence. Some would suggest that whereas scientists believe in “evidence”, Christians believe because they do not have any evidence. This is completely wrong, however, for Christians do have evidence, and it is found in the Word of God. What better evidence could there be? Whether it be matters natural or spiritual, the Bible is the best authority. In fact on matters spiritual it is the only reliable authority. So faith is not “a leap in the dark”, the act of one who is uninformed and reckless; rather it is the act of one who has approached the Word of God with the earnest desire to know the mind of God, and who has found that He is true to the promise He made long ago when He said, “And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart”, Jeremiah 29:13. Such people do not leap in the dark, for they walk in the light.

We notice that faith is the opposite of drawing back, according to 10:39. It is something that makes progress therefore, and presses on to what is before. This is what Habakkuk did, for he was given a vision of the return of Christ in glory, and walked by faith in the light of it. He was living his life in view of what God’s word said. So as we proceed into chapter 11 we shall find that all who are held up as examples of faith had the word of God in their minds and hearts, and they acted in faith because of that.

So verse 1 is telling us that faith is the substance of things hoped for. Because our faith rests on the sure word of God, what we believe has substance and reality. Future things that have been promised in God’s word are brought out of the future into our hearts. It is not that we believe them because we hope they are true, but because faith knows they are true, for faith is an intelligent thing.
The evidence of things not seen- because unseen things are promised in God’s word, when they are believed they become real in the soul, and our faith, based as it is on a solid foundation, is sure. In this way what we believe becomes the evidence within us that they shall come to pass. The faith and the hope merge into one. We shall find that the worthies mentioned in this chapter all had their eye on the future, but it was a future they could not see with the physical eye, only with the eye of faith.

11:2
For by it the elders obtained a good report.

For by it the elders obtained a good report- those who were spiritually mature and godly and set a good example in Old Testament times, were commended by God, for He bore witness to their faith. They worked out their inner faith by outward works, and thus gave expression to their belief. Because their faith was centred on commendable things, their faith was itself commendable to God. Such is the certainty of Divine things that it is no credit to anyone to believe them. It is simply the logical thing to do. But in His goodness God credits that faith with value, and commends the believer for it.

Note that the elders of a former age are here given as an example to the Hebrews, so there is no despising of Old Testament saints. This is important, for the epistle has given many reasons why the saints of old time were less privileged than we, but they still maintained strong faith in God.

Section (b) Verses 3-12
Faith in relation to God.

11:3
Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God- so faith has an understanding; it is not “through understanding we believe”. Faith is not a second-rate position, taken up by those who have no intelligence about matters. It is well-informed, because it is Bible-informed. Those who are prepared to accept the plain statements of Scripture are more enlightened than the best unbelieving scientist, for the believer is in touch with the God who “invented” science. It is true that the Bible is not a science textbook; it does not set out to be, but it is not anti-science, nor unscientific. It was only a misunderstanding about the Bible that caused religious people to believe the sun revolved around the earth. The believer has an understanding about the universe the unbeliever does not have, simply because he accepts the testimony that God has given in His word.
It is worth remembering that the Big Bang theory is not proven. It is only one way at looking at the universe, and an atheistic way at that.
Note that having spoken of the elders of a past day, and intending to further speak of them in the rest of the chapter, the writer speaks of “we”. He is linking past and present times together, and showing that faith is always relevant, and always pleasing to God. Because faith is based on the word of God, it accepts the testimony God gives about creation; it does not seek to modify it in the light of supposedly final statements of scientists. We all know that that which is confidently asserted as scientific fact one day, is just as likely to be dismissed as a mistaken theory the next. “The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away, but the word of the Lord endureth for ever”, 1 Peter 1:24.
So that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear- in other words, the worlds were not hidden away, and then by the spoken word of God caused to appear. Rather, “God spake, and it was done”, Psalm 33:9. They were not, and then they were. Only God possesses the ability to create in the sense of bring into existence. This is an important principle to understand in view of the examples given in this chapter. If we believe, (because the word of God says it), that all that came into being in the six days of creation was the result of God working, how much easier is it to believe that existing things, (although not seen as yet), shall also be brought into being. Faith lays hold of the future and brings it into the present, for the future things are real, being promised by God, and faith is the evidence of things not seen. It only remains for the future unseen things to be made apparent; but they already are to faith.
It is clear from this verse that there is no such thing as eternal matter, for the word for world used here is aionas, the worlds in relation to time. When God created all things, He did so, by His own testimony, (and this is the only testimony possible, in the nature of the case), at the beginning. Now this is a time-word, denoting when time started. God created by His eternal power, Romans 1:20, so the power was there, for He was there, but He chose the point at which to put it forth. Before that He existed in His solitary grandeur.
It is important to notice that the Lord Jesus, when referring to the making of male and female and the institution of marriage, said, “But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female,” Mark 10:6. The making of man and woman on the sixth day, therefore, was in the beginning of the creation, and not millions of years after Genesis 1:1. There is no room in this for a gap-theory, allowing countless years to roll by, for how can the making of man be at the beginning of creation when it is millions of years after creation?

11:4
By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.

By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain- faith is so important, and drawing back so disastrous, that we are given many and varied examples in this chapter of its exercise. Having seen faith in principle in verses 1-3, we now see faith in practice. By offering a sacrifice of which God approved, Abel shows he knew what the Divine requirements were. How was this? By the word of God. And how did the word of God come to him? From his father Adam, who had witnessed what had happened in the garden after he had sinned. He had seen an animal lose its life in order that he might be clothed, and thus made fit for the presence of God. This was a powerful testimony to the eventual sacrifice of Christ at Calvary, by which the believing sinner may be accepted in the sight of God through the merits and sacrifice of another. The sacrifice took the character of a burnt offering, for it is that offering alone which provides clothing for man, as Leviticus 7:8 compared with 4:11 would indicate.
But Adam would be able to pass on more to Abel, for he could inform him that God said, “I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel”, Genesis 3:15. There is promised here a deliverer from the one who instigated man to sin, but only at the cost of being bruised Himself. So we have a double indication in these events; there is the principle established that man can be acceptable in God’s sight by means of sacrifice, and that the evil one that caused him to sin will be dealt with. So Christ as The Sacrifice and the Seed, were made known in Eden. The work and the person, the Seed Born, (for He is of the woman), and the Seed Bruised, are clearly set out by God. And Abel would have these things passed on to him by his father.
On the basis of the revealed mind of God, then, Abel’s gave expression to his faith in the coming Deliverer and Sacrifice by offering to God a sacrifice that prefigured Calvary. Abel’s faith has reached down the centuries, laid hold of what God has promised He will do, and clasped it to himself. But he does more, he offers a sacrifice that tells of his intelligence in the matter.
Now Cain had the same information available to him as Abel did, but he chose to not believe, and gave expression to his unbelief by bringing of the fruits of the ground, as opposed to a sacrifice involving blood-shedding and the provision of a covering. Now no doubt Cain’s offering was of the best, for his pride and self-reliance would not allow him to bring anything less, but we learn that Abel’s sacrifice was more excellent than Cain’s. Cain’s was excellent physically and materially, but Abel’s was more excellent, being spiritual in character. Of course we would have to say about Christ’s sacrifice that it was most excellent, being personal and final. Abel and his offering were distinct from one another, but Christ was His offering.
By which he obtained witness that he was righteous- this makes clear that Abel was not justified because he brought an acceptable offering to God. Rather, he brought an offering to God because he was righteous. He had believed God, and it had been accounted to him for righteousness, and now he responds to God in a proper way. The apostle John assures us that “he that doeth righteousness is righteous, 1 John 3:7. It is not that he becomes righteous who does righteous things, but the reverse. After all, an unrighteous man cannot righteous deeds, for he has no capacity to do them. The accepted sacrifice of Abel was the visible sign of his invisible faith, for faith is always ready to give expression to its existence; it is not a lazy thing, but living and lively.
God testifying of his gifts- it is possible that Abel’s sacrifice was consumed by fire that came down from God. Some interpret the words “the Lord had respect unto Abel’s offering”, Genesis 4:4, as meaning “the Lord kindled into a flame”. Whether this is so or not, it is certainly true that when referring to Abel’s sacrifice, God said to Cain, “and if thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted?” implying that Abel had done well.
It delights the heart of God to receive the sacrifices of His people, whether those sacrifices take the form of worship, Hebrews 13:15; service, Philippians 2:17; the offering of self in devotion to God, Romans 12:1; or financial offerings, Hebrews 13:16. All these are forms of worship, and gratify the heart of the One, even the Father, who seeks worship, John 4:23.
And by it he being dead yet speaketh- the matters we have just mentioned are all brought to our notice through the sacrifice of Abel. It was an expression of worship; it represented service to God on his part; it meant that he was surrendered to God; and it involved the sacrificing of animals that he could otherwise have bartered or sold for other goods, (for meat-eating was not permitted at this stage). All these things are relevant to the readers of the epistle, and also to us today.

11:5
By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

By faith Enoch- whereas Abel looked forward to the coming of the Messiah in grace to be the sacrifice appointed, Enoch looked on to the coming of the Messiah in judgement, for he prophesied that the Lord would come with ten thousands of His saints to execute judgement, as Jude 17 records. No doubt the partial fulfilment of this was at the flood which came upon the ungodly after Enoch was taken.
Was translated that he should not see death- so he was translated because of the particular quality of his faith, for Abraham had faith but was not translated. Enoch walked with God, and upon the birth of his son Methuseleh it must have been revealed to him that the flood was coming, for he gave his son this name because it means “when he is dead it shall be sent”. And sure enough Methuselah lived on and on for 969 years, (eloquent testimony to “the longsuffering of God which waited in the days of Noah”, 1 Peter 3:20), and then died the year the flood came.
Enoch was a prophet, according to Jude 14, so he had insight into the mind of God, and was convinced that something lay beyond the coming judgement, for he appreciated that the judgement was simply the preliminary to better times, once the Messiah had come. He knew from Genesis 3:15 that the evil being that had brought sin into the world was going to be dealt with and the reward of his faith was that he was taken away from the judgement of the flood, and transported to better scenes.
And was not found, because God had translated him- those who were limited to the things of time and sense sought for Enoch, but he could not be found. This tells us that even his body was taken. His faith had received its logical outcome, for he had laid hold of future things, and they had become the strong evidence in his own soul that they were real. Those who had not this faith could only look for material things, like Enoch’s body.
For before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God- notice that his translation was a result of him pleasing God, hence the word “for”, explaining why he was translated. He pleased God because he walked by faith, and this is the reason he was taken, as the beginning of the verse also affirms. The New Testament equivalent of this is the rapture of the saints when the Lord Jesus comes into the air to take them to heaven. In 1 Thessalonians 4, the chapter that deals with this subject, believers are exhorted to walk and please God, verse 1, and then are told that the taking of believers to heaven is “if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, verse 14.” Whilst the rapture is not dependant on works, it does depend on the fact that those who are taken are believers, for no others will be affected at this time. So Enoch walked with God, Genesis 5:22, and also pleased God, Hebrews 11:5, and we are exhorted to do these two things also.
Notice that he had a testimony before he was translated. The time for testimony to God is now, and not hereafter, and this solemn thought should challenge us greatly.

11:6
But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

But without faith it is impossible to please him- we are left in no doubt that there is no alternative way of pleasing God. Those Hebrews who were tempted to go back to Judaism would do well to remember this, especially as God specifically says that He is not well-pleased with animal sacrifices, 10:8. Whilst it is true that there are many things believers may do to please God, the root of their action is their faith. It is only because they act in faith that any works are acceptable and pleasing to God.
For he that cometh to God- we have already been warned against drawing back to perdition in 10:39, and the alternative to drawing back, as Habbukuk made clear, is going forward in faith, for “the just shall live by his faith”, Habakkuk 2:4. Such people “come to God”, for they have God as their goal in their life of faith.
Must believe that he is- this is not simply belief in the existence of God, for no-one would start to come to God if they did not believe He existed. This is belief that He is what He claims to be. Faith responds to the revealed character of God, what He is in Himself, and therefore seeks to act in accordance with that character. This is certain to please God, for He delights to see a reflection of Himself in His people. The believer is created “after God in righteousness and true holiness”, Ephesians 4:24, and this is the outworking of that truth.
And that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him- God graciously rewards with His approval those that are exercised to seek Him so as to gain light about His character. The true believer seeks to conform to the righteousness and holiness He sees perfectly in His God. There needs to be a diligence about this seeking, for faith is an active and energetic thing.

11:7
By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.

By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet- it is very likely that it had never rained until the time of the flood, or else the rainbow would have been commonplace and not of any great significance. So when Noah was told by God that there would be a flood upon the earth, he realised that something was coming that he had not seen before. Being a man of faith, however, Noah accepted what God had said and acted upon it. He also saw the other side of the flood by faith, or he would not have built an ark to get there. He knew that the Seed promised in Genesis 3 had not yet arrived, and so there must be a fresh start after the flood.
Moved with fear- this is the reverential fear of a believer, that mixture of love and fear which adores Him and is in awe of Him. This fear is very practical, because moved by it, Noah acted in faith and obedience.
Prepared an ark to the saving of his house- Noah realises that if only he and his family are to survive the flood, then one of his sons must be of the line that shall produce the seed. So he prepares the ark to save his house so as to preserve the line of the Messiah. Noah, like Abel, receives and believes the word of God as to the coming Seed.
By the which he condemned the world- the only thing that could have saved the world in Noah’s day would have been universal repentance, as with Nineveh. As it was, they were condemned by the preparing of the ark, for it was an evidence that God was bringing judgement upon the earth. Noah preached as he built, so his ark became an object lesson. Enoch condemned the world by his walk with God and his preaching, Noah by his work for God and his preaching. Both are an example to us.
And became heir of the righteousness which is by faith- Noah was a righteous man by faith, not by building an ark. He was also a preacher of righteousness, 2 Peter 2:5, and thus testified to his belief in the righteous dealings of God, which involved judgement upon sin. He showed that he preferred righteousness to sin, and God rewarded him by allowing him to step out into a cleansed earth after the flood. He inherited what he longed for, and that which by faith he was entitled to as part of his inheritance.
He would also realise that if God was able to cleanse the earth of sin and bring in radically changed conditions, then He could do so again, but this time with the Messiah present to govern that earth. That situation is what Noah becomes heir to.

11:8
By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.

By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed- we might not think there was instant obedience if we limit ourselves to the Genesis record. We must allow not only this passage, but also Genesis 11 and Acts 7 to have their due weight.
Genesis 11:31 reads, “And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran his son’s son, and Sarai his daughter in law, his son Abraham’s wife; and they went forth with them from Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan; and they came unto Haran, and dwelt there”.

Genesis 12:1,4 reads, “Now the Lord had said unto Abram, ‘Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto a land I will show thee…so Abraham departed, as the Lord had spoken unto him'”.

Acts 7:2-4 reads, “The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was yet in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran, and said unto him, ‘Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and come into the land which I shall show thee’. Then came he out of the land of the Chaldeans, and dwelt in Charran: and from thence, when his father was dead, he removed him into this land, wherein ye now dwell”.

We must notice that the first passage records the “generations of Terah”, not that of Abraham his son. So we are not surprised that Terah is taking the initiative in that passage. When we come to Genesis 12 however, this marks the beginning of the generations of Abraham which extends up to Genesis 25:10 with the account of his burial. So we now have the action of Abraham himself as he moves in faith and obedience.

Stephen’s address in Acts 7 makes it clear that the God of glory appeared to Abraham in Ur, before he lived in Haran, verse 2. Having heard the voice of God, Abraham left Ur of the Chaldees, and this coincided with the decision of his father to go to live in Haran. So Abraham has obeyed the first part of the command. He has not moved because his father has moved, but because he is responding to the command of his God. When his father died he continued to obey God’s command, and now left his kindred and his father’s house.

If God had wished Abraham to do all three things at once, that is leave Ur, kindred and father’s house, surely they would have been listed in the reverse order. So Abraham would have left his father’s house first, said goodbye to his relations, and then crossed the border of the land of the Chaldees. But Abraham’s kindred were not in Ur, but in Haran. We learn this by reading the account of the search for a bride for Isaac. The servant went to the city of Nahor, Genesis 24:10, which does not mean the city named Nahor, but the city where Nahor lived, (as we learn from the account of Jacob’s search for a wife), but was named Haran, Genesis 28:2. Whether it was named after the brother of Abraham we are not told. So it is that he left his country first and went to Haran, in Padan-Aram. Terah is soon to die, so in deference to his father, he waits for him to die before leaving his kindred in Haran, listed in Genesis 22:20-24. He then left his father’s house not so much in a physical sense, but in the sense that he now set out on his own to establish his own household. He has obeyed God in the order in which God required obedience, and is now on his way to the land God has promised him.
This is summed up for us in Genesis 12:1, “Now the Lord had said unto Abram, ‘Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house'”. This is exactly what he did, and in that order. Notice that there is not a list of three things to be done at once necessarily, but the word “and” separates them, suggesting progressive actions. It can rightly be said in Genesis 12:4, “So Abram departed, as the Lord had spoken unto him”.
We must not think that Abraham had to have a second call, as if he had not responded properly to the first one in Ur. The expression “The Lord had said” is of a construction which involves the use of the Hebrew word “vau”, (normally meaning “and”), with the long tense. To quote Newberry’s Introduction, “More frequently, however, the vau is employed to stamp perpetuity on narratives of the past, forming what may be called ‘the Hebrew perfect’, a permanent record for time and for eternity”. So, far from saying, in effect, “The Lord had said “Get thee out” but Abraham had not completely obeyed”, the phrase is marking, at the beginning of the personal history of Abraham, the great and momentous thing that God was doing, as He separated Abraham from all the nations, tribes and families of the earth.
Into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance- in Genesis 11:31 it is made clear that Abraham did set out for Canaan, even though he stopped for a while at Haran. It is described by God as “a land I will show thee”. It is a land he has not seen before, and yet one day God will say to him, “Lift up now thine eyes…for all the land thou seest, to thee will I give it”, Genesis 13:14,15.
Obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went- here we have Scriptural support for thinking that Abraham obeyed God; he was not hesitant in his obedience. Noah was told specifically to build an ark, and was given the specifications for it, but Abraham was simply told to get out of Ur, and this he did. There is a close connection between faith and obedience, as the apostle makes clear when he writes of “the obedience of faith” in Romans 1:5, 16:26. Abraham no doubt took the recognised trade route from Ur to Haran, and Haran to Canaan, so he knew the road but he did not know where the road was eventually leading. This was faith indeed, trusting God to lead the way and bring him safely to the promised land.

11:9
By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise:

By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country- a sojourner is one who has not put down roots, and this was true of Abraham, for he knew that the land would not be his settled place until the promised Seed had come. The Lord Jesus said that “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad”, John 8:56. There was confidence in Abraham’s heart that even if he died, he would nonetheless see Messiah’s day of glory.
When Sarah died, Abraham purchased a portion of land in which to bury her, confessing to the Canaanites, “I am a stranger and a sojourner with thee”, Genesis 23:4, thus acknowledging that he as yet had not absolute right of possession. It was no different than if he had been in any other country in the world; Canaan was just like a foreign country to him, even though God had promised it to him. Faith laid hold of the promise, and was not dismayed by the sojourning.
Dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob- Abraham was 100 years old when Isaac was born, and 160 years old when Jacob was born, and he died aged 175. So he literally lived with both of them for 15 years. But the main point is that they shared with him the same attitude of sojourners; he had now built up a family of God-fearers, having left his idol-worshipping forbears behind, Joshua 24:2.
The heirs with him of the same promise- they did not need another call, just a reaffirmation of the promise to Abraham. In that confidence they were content to live in tents, as befitted their sojourner character. It is probable that when Genesis 33:1 says of Jacob that “he built him a house”, the “him” refers to Esau, who has been mentioned in the previous verse. In verse 19 Jacob pitches his tent on a parcel of ground he has purchased, so he still maintains his sojourner character, (tent), and his stranger character, (bought a parcel of field). The apostle Peter describes believers as strangers (to what is behind us and around us), and pilgrims, (as to what is ahead of us), 1 Peter 2:11, and thus they walk in the steps of their father Abraham, Romans 4:12.

11:10
For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.

For he looked for a city which hath foundations- this is what sustained him as he moved in the land. He had insight into fact that one day heaven and earth would be joined by a highway between earth and the holy city of Jerusalem, Revelation 21:9-22:5. If it is asked how Abraham knew this then surely the answer must be that he was the friend of God, so God did not hide from him the things he planned in the future; see Genesis 18:17, Isaiah 41:8.
So Abraham was content to pitch his tent, a comparatively flimsy structure, and one which was only lightly attached to the earth, having no foundations, for he knew there was city with foundations ahead of him.
Whose builder and maker is God- Abraham had left a city whose builder and maker was man; a city, moreover, dedicated to the moon-god, the moon being the ruler of the darkness. He gladly exchanged that city for one which shone with the glory of God and Christ. God in His wisdom has designed that city, (builder means designer), and God in His power has made it, so it is eminently to be preferred to anything of man.

11:11
Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised.

Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed- we now come to the first woman in the chapter. She is considered as to her own faith, for it is “Sarah herself”, not “Sarah the wife of Abraham”. It is good when the believing sisters are strong in faith because of personal exercise, and not simply reliant on the faith of their husbands.
As a 90 year old woman, who is also barren, Sarah was strengthened through faith to conceive a child. She had acted in unbelief before, and suggested that Abraham should have a son by Hagar his servant girl, and this he had done with disastrous results, which extend even to this day. Also, when told she would have a son herself, she laughed unbelievingly. She changed, however, and here can be commended for her faith.
And was delivered of a child when she was past age- she not only is strengthened in faith to conceive, but also to carry the child until his birth. She had laughed in mockery at the thought of having a son, but now she is able to laugh in a godly manner, for God has fulfilled His word. Abraham called the child Isaac, meaning “laughter”, and Sarah said, “God hath made me to laugh, so that all who hear will laugh with me”, Genesis 21:6. Her laughter was now the sort that could be fittingly shared with others, and not the laughter of unbelief.
Because she judged him faithful who had promised- this is how her faith expressed itself, for she believed that God would be faithful to the promise He had made that she should have a son. It was not simply that she believed she would have a child, but that she would have the child because God had promised it. She did not believe her having a child at that time was a coincidence.

11:12
Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as good as dead, so many as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable.

Therefore sprang there even of one- so Sarah’s faith complemented Abraham’s, for Sarah bore the child in faith, and there sprang a child of Abraham, thus furthering the purpose of God. It is God’s intention that a man and his wife should complete one another, or as Peter puts it when using Sarah and Abraham as an example of a good marriage, be “partakers together of the grace of life”, 1 Peter 3:7.
And him as good as dead- this fact is used by the apostle Paul in Romans 4 to illustrate the fact that just as Abraham and Sarah believed that God was able to bring life out of their virtually dead bodies, so He has brought Christ out from being really dead. The faith of Abraham and Sarah brought them great blessing, and so also great blessing comes to those who “believe on Him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification”, Romans 4:24,25.
So many as the stars of the sky in multitude- this is an allusion to the words of God when He made a covenant with Abraham in Genesis 15, before ever he had a child by Sarah. Showing him the stars in the sky above him, God said to Abraham, (who has just stated that he is going childless, or in other words, is about to die without a son and heir), “so shall thy seed be”, Genesis 15:5. There follows Abraham’s classic exercise of faith, which is emphasised in the New Testament, “Abraham believed in the Lord; and he counted it to him for righteousness”, verse 6.
And as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable- this alludes to God’s words to Abraham after he had shown himself prepared to offer his only son as a sacrifice, which thing was the climax of the faith he had in Genesis 15. James tells us that by offering Isaac the faith of Abraham was made perfect, and reached its true goal, James 2:22. So Abraham began by believing God could give Him a son, and then believed so firmly in God that he was sure God would give him to him again, but this time from the dead. At the start the birth of Isaac is emphasised, at the finish the “death” of Isaac is to the fore. It is very probable that there are as many stars in the heavens as there are grains of sand upon earth’s seashores, so the two metaphors are in proportion. Even though Abraham would only be able to see a few thousand stars, He who had placed the stars in the sky knew they were as innumerable (as far as man is concerned), as the grains of sand.
There are those who see in these two expressions a reference to the heavenly part of the believing seed of Abraham, and the earthly. The problem is that God also speaks of the seed as being like the dust of earth, Genesis 13:16, when Abraham was commanded to walk through the land. Perhaps a better way of looking at these three figures of speech is to say that the dust of the earth is the dust of the land of promise, so that when the seed of Abraham eventually possess the land, and it is under their feet, there will be the constant reminder that God has promised it to them. As they look above, they are reminded that their blessing comes from heaven, and that He who has set the stars in the sky has set them in their inheritance. And as they walk along its seashores they will recollect that God has promised to protect them, so that the sea of the Gentiles shall never overwhelm them again.

Section (c) Verses 13-16
Comment about those of previous section..

11:13
These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.

These all died in faith- the writer now pauses to summarise what he has said so far about the heroes of faith. He has told us Abel sacrificed by faith, that Enoch walked by faith, that Noah built by faith, that Abraham left Ur by faith, that Sarah bore a son by faith. But they all crowned their life of faith by dying in faith, so they died as they lived. The God they had proved in their lives, was the God who would care for them in death. And more than this, would bring them into the fulness of which they had only seen a part. They did not give up as time went by, and things seemed not to work out as fast as they thought. Note that Enoch is said to die, for “in Adam all die”. It is true that “and he died” is not said of Enoch in Genesis 5:24, as it is said of all the others in that genealogy, but that does not mean he did not die. Rather, it means that to him death was not the primary consideration. The Lord Jesus said of believers of this age, “If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death”, John 8:52, yet all the apostles died, and they surely kept His saying. The point is that death has lost its relevance for those who keep His saying. Enoch was in the good of that, remarkably.
Not having received the promises- clearly this means they had not received the plenary fulfilment of all that God had promised them. They had received the word of promise from God, but not the full substance of the promise.
But having seen them afar off- having told us what they did not do, namely, receive the fulfilment of the promises, we are now told four things they did do. The chapter begins with the statement that faith is the evidence of things not seen, and these believers so laid hold of God’s promise that they saw the fulfilment, albeit from afar. Their faith had brought the unseen things into the realm of the seen.
And were persuaded of them- faith, by definition is “a firm persuasion based upon hearing”. These had heard the word of God in some way, whether directly in the case of Enoch, Noah, Abraham and Sarah, or indirectly, in the case of Abel. And because the word was from God they were convinced it would come to pass.
And embraced them- this is a further development; from being unseen, to seeing afar off, and then being persuaded that they were not mistaken in what they saw; they now clasp those far-off things to their bosom in believing embrace, welcoming them as if they had already arrived.
And confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth- we see this illustrated in the words of Abraham when he bought a plot in which to bury Sarah, “I am a sojourner with thee”, Genesis 23:4. He thereby confessed that he had not entered fully into what God had promised, for the Seed had not yet come. He was a stranger in his own land, and yet he was travelling on as a pilgrim to the time when he would inherit the land. He was not a stranger and pilgrim in quite the sense believers are now. We travel through the earth as strangers to it permanently, and are pilgrims to a better land, heaven itself, for “our conversation is in heaven, Philippians 3:20, (where the idea behind the word “conversation” is citizenship). Abraham was a stranger because he could not possess the land in the fullest sense before Messiah the Seed came, for He is the Ultimate Heir. Abraham was a pilgrim until such time, for he could not settle if Messiah was not resident.

11:14
For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country.

For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country- the things they say are that they are strangers and pilgrims. By the very act of making this confession they indicate they anticipate something ahead. That “something” is a country; literally, a native-country, one they can really call their own in every sense of the word. Having originally been called out of his country, Chaldea, by God, Abraham was looking for a different sort of country. Not one polluted by idols and vice, but one where Christ was King, ruling in righteousness and holiness.

11:15
And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned.

And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out- if they had not been moving by faith, with their eye on the future, they might have looked back with longing to the comforts and conveniences of Ur of the Chaldees. No tent-life in the harsh desert for Abraham there. By all accounts Ur of the Chaldees was a very sophisticated city.
They might have had opportunity to have returned- the Devil was opposed to the idea of Abraham dwelling in the land, and he might very well have presented reasons to him why it would be a good idea to go back to Ur, especially if he found Abraham at any time considering that as an option. But Abraham, Isaac and Jacob resisted this temptation. The latter may have gone to Padan-Aram for a wife, but he did not carry on to Ur, but returned to Canaan.

11:16
But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for He hath prepared for them a city.

But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly- there is a contrast between the word “now” and the word “opportunity” of the previous verse. The latter word means a season, a period marked by certain features. If Abraham had longed after Ur, his life would have been characterised by that; he would have acted in line with his desire. This verse tells us, however, that with Abraham there was a constant “now” of obedience to God and His purpose. The reason why he was so resolute was that the country he looked for was heavenly in character. This by no means suggests that Abraham was looking to go to heaven. God had promised him the land, and unless he lives on that land the promise has failed. When Messiah reigns the land of Israel will indeed be a heavenly land, for He will put His stamp upon everything. The prayers of God’s people will have been answered, and the will of God will be done on earth as it is in heaven, Matthew 6:10.
Wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God- God is pleased to associate with those who take Him at His word, and live accordingly. Abraham has exchanged the vain gods of Chaldea for the true and Living God of heaven, and has come into such a relationship with Him that He belongs to him in truth. Moreover there is no embarrassment for God in Abraham having that relationship. Having a personal God is abundant compensation to Abraham for any loss sustained by not going back to Ur.
For he hath prepared for them a city- beginning with “for” as it does, this phrase explains why the writer is sure that God is not ashamed to be called their God- He has prepared for them a city because He wishes to be accessible to them. If God walked with Abraham, Enoch and Noah when they were in the flesh, how will He not wish to company with them when they have their resurrections bodies? So it is that there shall be a way between earth and the heavenly Jerusalem come down from heaven and from God, and the righteous shall walk that way into the heavenly city. The city is prepared with that in mind, which is why it has so many gates, and why those gates are emblazoned with the names of the tribes of Israel. See Revelation 21:12; Isaiah 35:8-10.

An introduction to the Levitical offerings

Leave a reply

Those believers who wish to gain an appreciation of the sacrifice of Christ at Calvary, would do well to begin their study in the tenth chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews.

Hebrews 10:1-25 brings to a close the main body of teaching in the epistle concerning the sacrifice of Christ. The passage may be divided into seven sections as follows:

Section one, verses 1-4, the situation under law as regards the worshippers, and sins are remembered.

Section two, verses 5-10, Christ as the offering, and a quotation from the Psalms, giving Christ’s words.

Section three, verse 11, the situation under law as regards the priests, and sins are not removed.

Section four, verses 12-14, Christ as the offerer.

Section five, verses 15-18, the situation under grace as regards Christ, and sins are removed and not remembered, and a quotation from the prophets giving the Spirit’s witness.

Section six, verses 19-22, the situation under grace as regards the worshippers and their approach to God.

Section seven, verses 24-25, the situation under grace as regards the worshippers and their attitude to their profession and their fellow-believers.

Since the passage begins with the word “for”, it presents to us the answer to an unspoken question which may have been something like the following: “Given that the work of Christ at Calvary is once for all in character, and that when He comes the second time it will be “without sin”, 9:28, or in other words, apart from any thought of having to deal with sin, what if believers sin in between their initial faith and His return?”

The answer is found in these verses, as it sets out for us the fact that God’s will now is to bless men on the established basis of the sacrifice of Christ. That sacrifice has sanctified believers once and for all, verse 10. And those thus sanctified are perfected for ever, verse 14. Moreover, the Spirit of God testifies that this is so in the words, “their sins and iniquities will I remember no more”, verse 17. It was one of the characteristics of the Levitical sacrifices that they caused a remembrance of sins, verse 3. Now all is different, for God pledges, not to forget sins, (for things forgotten may be recalled later), but to deliberately and positively remember our sins no more. He remembered them once against Christ at Calvary, and His sacrifice dealt so effectively with them that the matter of sins does not have to be brought up again, as far as believers are concerned.

Given that we owe our all to His sacrifice, we do well to have an intelligent appreciation of it in its varied aspects.

In verses 5-10 of Hebrews 10,the Lord Jesus is represented as speaking in the language of Psalm 40:6-8. Now that psalm is initially about David, for two reasons. First, because the title of the psalm is “To the chief musician, a psalm of David”. “Of David” can signify either one or both of two things. Those two things are that the psalm is written by David, and that it is about David, in the first instance. The second reason is that in verse 12 David admits to having iniquities, so the first reference is clearly to the psalmist. Only in a limited way, and within Divinely indicated boundaries, can the psalm be applied to Christ. To see how that application is made we must first of all see how it relates to David personally.

Clearly, according to verses 1-5, David had experienced a great deliverance, and he is deeply thankful to God. He realises that bringing an offering as thanksgiving is one option open to him under the law. But he is a prophet, with insight into the mind of God, and he knows that to bring an animal sacrifice is not the best way of showing his gratitude; rather, he should surrender himself to God’s will. This will be in line with the teaching of the other prophets. For instance, Samuel asked Saul, “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”, 1 Samuel 15:22. Micah spoke to the same effect, “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 firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? He hath showed thee, O 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? Micah 6:6-8. During the ministry of the Lord Jesus, a scribe said, “there is one God; and there is none other but He: and to love Him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices”. The verdict of the Lord Jesus on this remark was that the man had answered discreetly, that is, sensibly and prudently, and that he was not far from the kingdom of God, Mark 12:32,33.

David has grasped this principle, and therefore resolves to present himself as a living sacrifice, vowing to do God’s will, and to delight in the doing of it, Psalm 40:6-8. This will be much better than mere religious observance, which may be carried out by unbelievers. Accordingly, like the Hebrew servant of old, who pledged to do his master’s will for ever, Exodus 21:1-6, David will allow his ear to be digged, or opened, so that it is ready to hear the commands of His God.

So delightful to the heart of God are David’s words, that He uses them to tell us of His Son in Hebrews 10. The Spirit takes up David’s expressions, and gives them a fresh dimension, so that they may more fully express Christ’s resolve. We see this in the following ways:

First, David had come to do God’s will as one whose name was in the book that God keeps of those who live upon the earth, see Exodus 32:32; Psalm 139:16. Christ, too, is real man, but unlike David, He had come into the world from His Father, being “that eternal life, which was with the Father, and as manifested unto us”, 1 John 1:2. When David signified his willingness to do God’s will, he did so as a mature man, whereas Christ came to do God’s will from the very outset.

Second, the stipulation with regard to the Hebrew servant was “if he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself”, Exodus 21:3. But those words may be rendered as the Newberry margin, which reads, “if he come in with his body, he shall go out with his body”. David had expressed his readiness to respond to God’s commands by having his ear opened, but Christ’s words were, “a body hast Thou prepared Me”. It is true that by having his ear opened David was ready to serve with his body, but with Christ there is the more precise and inclusive statement. The use of the word body in Hebrews 10 is all the more pertinent, because we are sanctified by the offering consisting of the body of Jesus Christ once for all, verse 10. (the word ‘offering’ in that verse is a noun, not a form of verb). And His suffering is compared with what happened to the bodies of beasts in Hebrews 13:11,12.

Third, the word David used for “opened” is translated in Psalm 22:16 as “pierced”, in the expression, “they pierced my hands and my feet”. This shows how far the Lord Jesus was prepared to go in service to God, for He was “obedient unto death, even the death of the cross”, Philippians 2:8. Sincere as David was, no doubt, he could never match the service of Christ.

Fourth, the word David used for “opened” can not only mean pierced, but also prepared. This meaning the writer to the Hebrews takes up, and applies to Christ. His body was prepared in a way David’s never was, for He was born of a virgin, and consequently, tendency or ability to sin was absent from Him. Such a preparation was vitally important, for He could not be a suitable sacrifice without it.

Fifth, as one born into the world, David’s name was in the book of the living. Christ, however, was not only mentioned in another book, but was the subject of it, for as Peter said, “to Him give all the prophets witness”, Acts 10:43. More particularly, the book of the law, which contains the details of the sacrifices, when read in the light of New Testament revelation, is seen to be written about Him.

Sixth, the only option open to David after he had realised that the better way of showing gratitude was to surrender himself to the will of God, was to offer his body in service. This service, however, despite David’s good intentions, would be marred by sin to some degree or other. With Christ’s service, however, there was perfection, for He loved His God with all His heart, understanding, soul and strength, and He could be typified by sacrifices that were “without blemish”.

Seventh, David knew that God was not deriving pleasure from the sacrifices, and knew they were not what God’s final will was, but he could do nothing about rendering them obsolete and taking them out of the way, and establishing that which did please God fully. That was beyond him. It was not beyond Christ, however, for He had complete insight into His Father’s will, and set about the task of establishing that which would satisfy Him eternally. He does this in such a thorough way that the old sacrifices are rendered obsolete.

We might ask why God was not pleased with the sacrifices, since He instituted them. The answer is found in the comment the writer to the Hebrews makes at the end of verse 8, “which are offered by the law”. Mechanical observance can never please God. He looks for a heartfelt, energetic, purposeful carrying out of His will. And this was what marked Christ- “I come to do Thy will. O God”, are His words. And the force of the expression “to do” is that He will do willingly, intelligently, and from the heart. It is the same expression as is found in Galatians 3:10, “all things that are written in the book of the law to do them”. Not outward observance, such as can be noticed and approved of by one’s fellowmen, (see Matthew 6:2,5,16; Philippians 3:6), but inward resolve, which only God can see. Such is the attitude of Christ as He takes upon Him the form of a servant, Philippians 2:7, putting His body at the disposal of the one to whom He was subject.

The sacrifices of old time were of four sorts, as verses 5 and 6 list them. There were sacrifices proper, a reference to the peace offering. Then offerings, meaning the meal offering. Then the burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin. Each of these foreshadows a particular aspect of Christ, as He was in the world for God, and as He went to Calvary in submission to His will. The peace offering tells of one who is in perfect harmony with His God and Father. The meal offering prefigures God’s Ideal Man, whose life was so pleasing to His Father, and presented such a contrast to the lives of those around Him. The burnt offering told of Christ’s utmost devotion, whose commitment to His Father’s interests was total. The sin offering tells of one who, although He knew no sin, nevertheless was made sin, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him, 2 Corinthians 5:21.

It is important and instructive to notice the order in which the offerings are detailed for us in the early chapters of Leviticus. There is first the offering that was wholly burnt upon the altar, (except the skin of the animal). The burnt offering was reserved by God for Himself. Even the giving of the skin to the priest who officiated supports this, for as he offered up the carcase he was acting as a holy priest, offering up to God, but if he wore the skin when he was not officiating at the altar, then he was acting as if a royal priest, showing forth to men the excellencies of what had been offered in sacrifice, see 1 Peter 2:5,9.

Only when the heart of God has been satisfied by the burnt offering can the sin offering be introduced. This is worthy of notice, for as we come together to remember the Lord, and as we engage privately in worship, we should be careful to observe this Divine order. It is possible for us to be very self-centred in our worship, concentrating on those things which bring benefit to us, and neglecting the way in which the sacrifice of Christ was an act of devotion to His Father, totally apart from the benefits it brings to us.

Of course it is true that the Lord spoke of the cup as being the New Covenant in His blood, which was shed for many for the remission of sins, Matthew 26:28, but that does not mean that this should be our only thought as we come together. After all, His command was to remember Him, calling Him to mind in all the acceptableness of His person, concentrating on Him. If the Spirit should prompt us to combine that with some aspect of His sacrifice for sins, then none dare gainsay that. But to come together with the intention of focussing only on our blessings, is to betray ignorance of the true nature of the gathering, and is to deprive our God of what it is He looks for from us.

It goes without saying that this will demand that our hearts and minds be full of Christ as we come together. We cannot fill those hearts and minds with the things of self and the world during the hours of the week, and then come together and expect to have something to offer. The psalmist spoke of the things which he had made, Psalm 45:1.

This is not to say that we should come together with prepared prayers, nor that we should be content with reciting the same things week after week, but it does mean that we shall have at our disposal thoughts of Christ which, if appropriate to the way the meeting is proceeding, may be suitably offered to God, and to which a hearty “Amen” can be added by all in the company. This will result in a freshness that is the very essence of Spirit-led worship.

We deceive ourselves if, with barren hearts, we come together and fill the time with hymn-singing, and go away thinking we have worshipped at a high level. After all, the hymns we sing are the spiritual exercises of others, which we may adopt in moderation, just as the ministry in the upper room closed with a psalm. We should not rely on them to mask our own lack of exercise.

May the Lord exercise our hearts in this matter, that week by week as we come together, and at our private devotions, we may have that to offer which gratifies His heart, as we remind the Father of the excellencies of His Son. The words of Joseph to his brethren are appropriate in this connection, “Go tell my father of all my glory”, Genesis 35:13.

It might be helpful if we note a series of contrasts between the burnt offering and the sin offering. Both speak of Christ, but we ought to be alert to the different emphasis of each, so that as we engage in worship, whether individually, or collectively in the assembly, we may do so with intelligence. The Lord Jesus made clear that true worshippers not only worship in spirit, but also in truth, John 4:23,24. His statement is full of meaning, and part of that meaning is that true worship is not now concerned with physical sacrifices, (although we should remember that part of Christian worship has to do with the giving of material assistance, Hebrews 13:16), but rather with the spiritual truths they set forth.

ACCEPTANCE OR FORGIVENESS

In the burnt offering there is a question of acceptance, for the acceptableness of the offering was transferred to the offerer when he laid his hands upon it. How gratifying it must have been to read the words “it shall be accepted for him”, Leviticus 1:4. How much more gratifying for us to know that because of Calvary God has caused believers to be accepted in the Beloved, Ephesians 1:6. All that the Father finds delightful about His Son is attributed to His people; we are graced in Him.

The sin offering was different, however, for now the unacceptableness of the offerer is dealt with by being transferred to the offering, so that atonement for sin can be made. The apostle Paul had this side of things in mind when he wrote “For He hath made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him”, 2 Corinthians 5:21. These words are an echo of what is stated in Leviticus 16:9, where the words “offer him for a sin offering” can be literally rendered “make it sin”. Who can tell what it meant to Christ to be made sin; to be reckoned by God as if He were sin itself, and to be treated accordingly?

THE FIRE MAKING OR DESTROYING

In the burnt offering the fire is said to make the offering, for it is “an offering made by fire”, Leviticus 1:9. As the flame fed upon the carcase, there was caused to ascend heavenwards that which spoke to God of Christ. As the flame progressed from one part to the other, (for the parts of the animal were laid in order, not at haphazard), the varied excellencies of Christ came before the Father in all their acceptablenes. The head would tell of His intelligent devotion; the legs His patient progress; the inwards His heart-affection, and the fat His energetic determination to please His Father in all things. At Calvary these things that had been so delightful to His Father during His life, were now surrendered in holy sacrifice.

With the sin offering, however, the flame consumed the carcase, destroying it so that it was utterly done away. This is what Christ has done by His sacrifice, for “once in the end of the world hath He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself, Hebrews 9:26. The expression “put away” meaning to abolish or destroy. Hebrews 13:11,12 interprets the fire for us. It was nothing less than suffering. The bodies of beasts burnt outside the camp find their counterpart in Jesus suffering without the gate. With this difference, however, that the animal was dead when it was burnt, but Christ suffered before He died, and in those hours of darkness upon the cross endured what no tongue can tell. Every faculty was alert and alive to the pain. His senses not at all dulled by sin as with us. He endured unimaginable horrors at the hand of His God because of our sins. The penalty was not one whit lessened because it was The Son who was paying the price. The wrath was not less fierce because of who it was that suffered under it. God said He would spare Israel “as a man spareth his own son that serveth him”, Malachi 3:17. Yet here is the Son beyond all sons, who had served beyond all others, and He is not spared! As the apostle Paul wrote in Romans 8:32, “He that spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things?”

VOLUNTARY OR COMPULSORY

The burnt offering was a voluntary offering, for “of his own voluntary will” is the language of Leviticus 1:3. Christ came willingly to Bethlehem, stooping to take the servant’s form and to be made in the likeness of men. His willingness took Him further still, for He humbled Himself even unto death, and that the death of the cross, Philippians 2:8. His devotion was unmistakeable, for coming into the world He said, “Lo, I come, (in the volume of the book it is written of Me,) to do thy will, O God”, Hebrews 10:7. Christ went willingly to Calvary, for although men “led Him away”, it is also true that He “went forth” to that place to do the Father’s will, John 19:16,17.

The sin offering was compulsory, however, for “let him bring”, is the decisive and immediate requirement of God, Leviticus 4:3. Sin made its demands on Christ, and He would not rest until the obligation laid upon Him to settle the matter to His Father’s glory was accomplished. He could say “But that the world may know that I love the Father; and as the Father gave Me commandment, even so I do”, John 14:31. That He has satisfied every Divine requirement regarding sin is seen in the fact that He has sat down on the right hand of the One whose will He had promised to do, Hebrews 10:12. He who is the brightness of Divine glory, and the exact expression of the essence of God, had purged sins in such a glorious way that He could sit Himself down on the right hand of God in all His majesty with the utmost confidence, Hebrews 1:3.

SWEET SAVOUR OR INTENSE DISPLEASURE

The burnt offering was a sweet savour offering, God’s nostrils being delighted by that which spoke to Him of Christ. When Noah offered his burnt offerings after the flood, it is said that the Lord smelled a sweet savour, Genesis 8:20,21. Literally these words could be rendered, “a savour of rest”, or “a soothing fragrance”. After looking upon all the turmoil and unrest of the pre-flood world, God could at last rest in what spoke to Him of Calvary. After all the distress to His heart, when men’s imagination was only evil continually, how soothing for Him to enjoy the fragrance of Noah’s sacrifice, anticipating as it did the effects of the work of Christ.

The sin offering was not like this, however, for there is no mention of a sweet savour with it. Sin is hateful to God, and gives Him no pleasure. Surely it gave God no pleasure to judge His Son. It is true that Isaiah said “Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise Him”, Isaiah 53:10, but this means that it was God’s good pleasure, His determining will, to do this thing. Much as a convicted criminal may be “detained at Her Majesty’s pleasure”. We may be certain that Queen Elizabeth derives no enjoyment from that situation, but it is her sovereign pleasure nonetheless. Because Christ was made sin, He must needs be treated by God as if He is that detestable thing. From that standpoint there was no pleasure for God in the matter.

NEARNESS OR DISTANCE

The burnt offering was burnt on the altar, which became known because of this as the altar of burnt offering, Exodus 40:29. This was the place where God promised He would meet with His people, Exodus 29:43. The altar becomes the point at which God, sacrifice, and people meet. Such is Calvary, for did not the Lord Jesus say, “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto Me”, John 12:32?

The major part of the sin offering, however, was burnt outside the camp, the place of rejection. So the burnt offering emphasised the nearness of Christ to the Father as He undertook the work of sacrifice, whereas the sin offering highlighted the distance at which Christ was put because of our sin. As the prophet said about Israel, “But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid His face from you, that He will not hear”, Isaiah 59:2.

HEAVENWARD OR DOWNWARD

The burnt offering was lifted up onto the altar, the blood was sprinkled round about upon the altar, and a sweet savour ascended up from the altar, so everything was elevated heavenwards. Now the “burnt offering gospel”, is the gospel of John. It is that gospel which emphasises the relationship between the Son and the Father typified so wonderfully by the burnt offering. The gospel, too, which tells of the upward journey of Christ via the place of sacrifice.

He speaks to Nicodemus of ascending to heaven, John 3:13, then speaks of being lifted up on the cross, as the brazen serpent had been lifted up, verse 14. He speaks of giving His flesh for the life of the world, then asks, “What and if ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up where He was before?” John 6:51,62. He refuses to allow Mary to touch Him, because He was not yet ascended to the Father, John 20:17. (Her contact with Him must be a spiritual one, forged once He had returned to His Father and sent down the Spirit from thence). Yet His conversation with Mary took place in the garden of the place where He was crucified, John 19:41, thus linking the sacrifice and the ascending together. He speaks of His ascent in the place of His sacrifice. Just as the angel who appeared to Manoah and his wife ascended up in the flame of the burnt offering, Judges 13:20, may we not say that in a grander way, Christ has ascended in the flame of His sacrifice? Yet John does not record the ascension, as if to indicate that the return of Christ to heaven was to him a foregone conclusion.

With the sin offering, however, all was downward. The animal was burnt on the ground, (except the fat which was burnt on the altar), the blood was poured out at the base of the altar, (except what was sprinkled before the vail, or on the altars), and the fire consumed the carcase until all that was left was a heap of ashes on the ground. How low Christ was prepared to go for us! Not content with descending to earth, He humbled Himself still further to the depths of suffering at Calvary. But He who went so low, has been taken up so high, for the same God and Father who required His obedience, has “also”, as well as doing that, highly exalted Him, Philippians 2:9.

Whilst all these things are true, it is also instructive to notice that God was careful to preserve the integrity of the person of Christ even in these Old Testament illustrations. God is a jealous God, jealous of His own glory and that of His Son.

So we find that the sin offering is killed in the same place as the burnt offering, on the north side of the altar, and before the Lord, Leviticus 4:24. The same place witnessed the death of two very different sorts of sacrifice. Calvary, too, witnessed the death of one who combined in His person the burnt offering aspect of things and also the sin offering side.

Again, we find that although the major part of the sin offering was to be burnt up outside the camp in the place of rejection and loneliness, the fat was to be burnt as a sweet savour on the altar of burnt offering, Leviticus 4:8-10.

Yet again, we read that the sin offering was to be burnt where the ashes of the burnt offering were poured out, in a clean place, Leviticus 4:12. The ashes of the burnt offering had been collected with due ceremony and deposited in a clean place outside the camp, Leviticus 6:11, and it is in this selfsame place that the sin offering was burnt, so that when the fire had done its work, a pile of ashes remained that was a mixture of burnt offering ashes and sin offering ashes. Could anything more graphically preserve the integrity of Christ, in that even when dealing with sins in the place of abandonment, He was associated by God with that which spoke of full acceptance? God spared not, but it was His own Son that He spared not. God gave to the horrors of Calvary, but it was His only begotten Son that He gave, John 3:16.

May the Lord help us to have an enhanced appreciation of these things, so that we may offer to our God the intelligent and adoring worship He so much desires from our hearts. “Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ”, 1 Peter 2:5.

There is also a contrast between the sin and trespass offerings. The latter dealt with that which had offended God’s nature, whereas in the trespass offering it was God’s government of the nation which had been contravened.

In the sin offering the value of the offering demanded depended on the degree of responsibility of the sinner. With the trespass offering proper, however, (as opposed to the special case of the trespass offering for a sin offering in 5:1-13), the offering required was the same for all, with the degree of trespass against God or man being reflected in the amount of monetary compensation that had to be paid.

The Burnt Offering: Part 3

Leave a reply

THE BURNT OFFERING: PART 3

CONTINUATION OF THE SUBJECT OF THE SINLESSNESS OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST

This truth of the sinlessness of Christ is of tremendous importance, for the requirement of old was nothing less than perfection, for God said, “it shall be perfect to be accepted” Leviticus 22:20-22. Anything less than this rendered the animal disqualified. God does not alter His requirements at all. Who cannot see that if there were any trace of sin in Christ, whether of heart or hand, thought or word, then He would not be suited to the task of going into death sacrificially? How can He be a saviour who himself needs to be saved? Drowning men are not rescued by drowning men, but by those who stand secure upon the rock and throw them a lifeline.

Of course the temptation of the Lord Jesus may present problems to us in this connection, but the answer to those problems is, as ever, to accept the plain statements of Scripture. We must not tamper with one doctrine to try to make another more easy to understand, nor should we allow what we do not know, to rob us of what we do know. There are those who wish to teach that the Lord Jesus, whilst not actually sinning under temptation, nevertheless could have done so. Otherwise, they say, His temptation was not real.

The writer believes that these are wrong notions concerning the person of Christ and come about because of a wrong understanding of the word “tempt”. The word translated “tempt” means ‘to make an experience of, to pierce or search into, to try with the purpose of discovering what of good or evil was in a person or thing’ (Trench’s New Testament Synonyms). So the predominant idea is one of testing and assessing. Failing the test is not inevitably involved.

Because believers still have the capacity to sin and because, too often, we do sin when tested, we have come to think of temptation as always, or nearly always, connected with sinning. When we think of the temptation of Christ, there is absolutely no reason to immediately think of sin as an inevitable consequence. In fact, when the writer to the Hebrews speaks of the temptation of Christ, he expressly rules out the matter of sin in connection with it, “in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin” Hebrews 4:15. The last phrase “yet without sin” qualifies and restricts “in all points”, and therefore is not to be understood as meaning that the end result of the temptation was that He did not sin, although that is in fact true, but that His temptation came only from without, not from a sinful nature within. After all, the context is dealing with the ability of Christ our High Priest to sympathise with us in our trials on the earth, He having passed this way before, returning to heaven fully qualified to bear our burdens. He cannot sympathise with sin, for He does not know what it is to sin. But He can sympathise with us in our trials, having been tried in all points as we are.

Even in circumstances where the temptation, if succumbed to, would have resulted in sin, such as the temptation by the devil in the wilderness, Christ is seen to be triumphant, for having been led of the Spirit into the wilderness He returns in the power of that same Spirit into Galilee Luke 4:1,14. Nothing that had taken place in between had resulted in the Spirit being grieved. There had been no independent action, (such as turning stones into bread without a word from His Father), no deviation from the Father’s will, (such as casting Himself down from the pinnacle of the Temple), no seeking glory and splendour, (such as coveting the kingdoms of the earth), but rather a humble reliance on His Father.

It was precisely because the Lord Jesus was unable to sin, that the pressure of the temptation was felt by Him so keenly. Imagine a length of sea wall, built with the purpose of keeping back the raging sea. One section is constructed by a competent engineer, with the very best materials, whilst the adjoining section is of faulty construction, using second-rate materials. Which section will feel the pressure of the waves the most? Surely the well-constructed section will, as it resists the force of the waves hurled against it. The faulty section soon gives way under trial and no longer feels the pressure of the water. Shall we be so foolish as to say that because the good wall did not give way, then it was not tried? Shall we also foolishly say that because Christ did not give way under trial and temptation, that He therefore was not really tested? This would fly in the face of the Scriptures which say that Christ suffered, being tempted, Hebrews 2:18. To Him, temptation meant suffering, as He resisted that temptation to the utmost. Too often, with us, temptation means enjoyment, as we give in to the temptation and allow the flesh to gratify itself.

Besides these considerations, we must remember that in the one person, Jesus Christ, there were two natures, manhood and Deity, brought together in union which is complete and indissoluble, so that every act and thought is of One who is both God and man. He does not do some things as God and some things as man, but His person is one. For example, He slept during the storm on the lake, for He was God manifest in flesh; and He rebuked the winds and the waves because He who was manifest in flesh is God.

So that those who suggest that Jesus Christ could sin, are suggesting that He who is God manifest in flesh could sin. Now there are certain things that God cannot do, for they would undermine the very nature of His Being, and one of those things is to sin. We conclude therefore that Christ was unable to sin.

There is a passage in the Old Testament, in Numbers chapter 4, which illustrates the point we have been trying to make as to the purity of Christ. This chapter gives instructions for the transporting of the holy vessels of the tabernacle through the wilderness. Brought out from the sacred confines of either the Court or the Sanctuary, they were carried through the desert with its sandstorms and dusty ways until the next stopping place was reached. Yet no mention is directly made to the laver, that which held the water for the washing of the feet of the priests before they entered the Holy Place. Is there not in this the suggestion that Christ, a true “vessel unto honour” who emerged from the Heavenly Courts to tread a path through this wilderness-world, was pure and undefiled, needing not the washing of water by the word as a remedy for defilement, but was ever “the undefiled in the way” who is “blessed,” Psalm 119:1?

How different are the Lord’s people, who although washed all over at conversion to fit them for their new state of regeneration John 13:10; Titus 3:5, nonetheless need the habitual application of the Word of God with its cleansing power, to deal with defilement contracted during daily life in this polluted world through which they pass, Ephesians 5:26. The Eastern traveller, although starting out on his journey as one who had bathed, nevertheless needed to wash his dusty feet at the end of the day’s journey John 13:10.

Before passing from the consideration of the four parts which are specially mentioned as being laid upon the altar, we must note some practical lessons which may be learnt at this point. The apostle Paul beseeches us to present our bodies to God as a living sacrifice, Romans 12:1. It follows therefore that the head, (our mind), the fat, (our energies), the inwards, (our hearts’ affections) and the legs, (our walk) must all be in an holy and acceptable state if we are to truly be something for God.

Hence the apostle exhorts the Philippians to let the same mind which was in Christ be in them, Philippians 2:5; he speaks of glorying in infirmities, that the power of Christ might rest on him, 2 Corinthians 12:9; of the love of Christ constraining him, 2 Corinthians 5:14; and of his ways in Christ, 1 Corinthians 4:17. Thus the believers’ mind, energy, love and movements, if like Christ’s, will all co-ordinate together and be for the delight of God Then his mind will be governed by God’s word, so that his energies may be put forth with intelligence; and his love for Christ will ensure that he goes where He leads.

At last the moment has come for which such careful preparation has been made, and the fire can begin its work. Note that all is to be placed upon the altar, reminding us of the total and unreserved commitment of the Lord Jesus to the work given Him to do. Nothing of what He was or did was in any way unacceptable to God, for the testimony from heaven was, “well-pleased” and He did always those things which pleased the Father, John 8:29. The word from heaven in Malachi’s day was that God found no pleasure in His people Malachi 1:10, nor would He accept an offering at their hand. At last there is One upon the earth who is different and unique and this totally acceptable person willingly presented Himself to God in His entirety, withholding nothing.

Under the action of the fire, the sacrifice was transformed into a cloud of incense (such is the meaning of the word for burn in verse 9), which in God’s estimate was of a sweet savour, or a savour of rest. How unsavoury this world must be to God; the best of nations was likened to a defiled leper, with putrefying sores neither tended nor dressed, Isaiah 1:6. What of the rest of men who are described by God as being filthy? Psalm 14:3.

How refreshing therefore it must have been to God to see One whose person, given up in sacrifice, resulted in nothing but a pleasurable aroma, with no admixture of the stench of sin. The idea involved in this sweet-savour was that of complete complacency. At last God has reached His long sought-for goal, even pleasure in man. He had rested after His work of creation, for all had been completed and could be pronounced “very good”, but He could not use those words of man after sin had come in. On the basis of the person and work of Christ there is joy and refreshment for God in the new creation made possible by His sacrifice and in this new creation all things are of God and in conformity with His desires. What a tremendous privilege and blessing it is to be part of that new creation in Christ, 2 Corinthians 5:17, and to be involved in that which gives God pleasure. We might well heed the exhortation of the apostle to not receive the grace of God in vain, but rather to act in the light of that grace which has brought us such rich and eternal blessing, and live lives which in practice are taken up with new things and dispense with the old.

Here we come to the end of the first division of the chapter and we have seen in type One who moved on earth and died on the Cross, only for the sake of His Father’s interests Whose first recorded words are “Wist ye not that I must be about My Father’s business?” Luke 2.49 and who could say a few moments before He died “It is finished,” John 19:30.

THE WORDS OF THE BIBLE, THE CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURES, AS FOUND IN THE BOOK OF LEVITICUS CHAPTER 1, VERSES 10 TO 13

1:10 And if his offering be of the flocks, namely, of the sheep, or of the goats, for a burnt sacrifice; he shall bring it a male without blemish.
1:11 And he shall kill it on the side of the altar northward before the Lord: and the priests, Aaron’s sons, shall sprinkle his blood round about upon the altar.
1:12 And he shall cut it into his pieces, with his head and his fat: and the priest shall lay them in order on the wood that is on the fire which is upon the altar:
1:13 But he shall wash the inwards and the legs with water: and the priest shall bring it all, and burn it upon the altar: it is a burnt sacrifice, an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the Lord.

SECTION 2 VERSES 10-13 THE OFFERING FROM THE FLOCK

1:10 And if his offering be of the flocks, namely, of the sheep, or of the goats, for a burnt sacrifice; he shall bring it a male without blemish.

We come now to that section which deals with the sheep or the goat brought for sacrifice. Since much of what is found in verses 10-13 is identical to the first section, we shall concentrate on the sheep and goats themselves and the statement of verse 11 “he shall kill it on the side of the altar northward”.

The animal which we tend to think of first in relation to sacrifice is the lamb. The well-known words of Genesis 22:8 could be cited, “My son, God will provide Himself a lamb for a burnt offering,” or of Isaiah 53:7, “He is brought as a lamb to the slaughter,” (although the word “slaughter” is not regularly used for sacrifice, yet verse 10 shows Calvary is in view), or of John the Baptist in John 1:29,36 – “Behold the Lamb of God”. All these passages bring before us the idea of the lamb for sacrifice, and Christ is that lamb. Note that in each of the passages referred to there is the idea of movement, for it is said of Abraham and Isaac, that “they went both of them together. And Isaiah speaks of Christ being led, and John refers to Jesus coming, and walking. With these statements we might contrast a further reference to the lamb, this time in Revelation 5:6, “stood a Lamb”. Clearly the movement and what was involved in that movement are both over.

In Genesis 22 the father and the son go together to the place of sacrifice, the one to offer, the other to be offered. How wonderfully this has been repeated in the New Testament, for did not the Lord Jesus say the night before He died, “I am not alone, the Father is with Me”? John 16:32. This remark is made in the Gospel which does not record those words of the Saviour when upon the Cross, “My God, My God, Why hast Thou forsaken Me?” The Lord may be forsaken of His God upon the Cross when made sin, but the fact remains that He and His Father are One and nothing can alter that eternal condition.

There is movement further on in Genesis 22:19, where we read of the father and the young men going together to Beer-sheba. Abraham’s young men, having seen the place of sacrifice afar off, verses 4 and 5; and knowing that on Moriah death and resurrection have, in figure, transpired, Hebrews 11:17-19, are able to go with the father to dwell where he dwelt. So likewise, believers of this age who look back to Calvary and see the place of sacrifice afar off, now press on in fellowship with the Father to dwell at last in the Father’s house, 1 John 1:3; John 14:2,3.

When we turn to Isaiah’s reference to the lamb, we find that he presents us with a contrast between the erring, wandering nation, like a flock of sheep gone astray, and the Lord Jesus, never straying but always “before Jehovah” Isaiah 53:6,2. Never did He deviate from the path of righteousness, Psalm 23:3, nor walk in the counsel of the ungodly, Psalm 1:1. Note how Mark records His progress towards Jerusalem, the place of His crucifixion, for he writes, “they were in the way going up to Jerusalem; and Jesus went before them: and they were amazed; and as they followed, they were afraid,” Mark 10:32. Well might the disciples be amazed at the sight, for even though He knew the cruel death of the Cross lay before Him, yet not for one moment does He hesitate, but presses forward. As they followed, they were afraid, for they were beginning to realise the solemn implications of being a true follower of Christ, with the duty of taking up one’s cross and following Him.

If in Genesis 22 we have fellowship in connection with the lamb, and in Isaiah 53 and Mark 10 following the lamb, and not straying, then in John 1 we have the fulfilment of Scripture through the lamb. “All the prophets and the law prophesied until John” were the words of the Lord Jesus Himself, Matthew 11:13. So when in the first chapter of John’s Gospel we find that John “seeth Jesus coming unto him” he is simply doing what all other true prophets in Old Testament times had done, as they anticipated and awaited the coming of the Messiah. When he cries “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world”, he is gathering together the testimony of the centuries concerning the Person and work of the Saviour. For as we have already noted, Abraham assured his son that God would provide Himself a lamb and here at last on the banks of the Jordan was the Lamb of God.

The second book of Moses had spoken of the Passover lamb as “the” lamb, Exodus 12:4, and this also finds its echo in the words of John “Behold the Lamb”. Again the ritual of the Day of Atonement involved a goat which bore away sins and Christ is the fulfiller of that type too, for He is the bearer away of sin, says John. So much for extracts from the law of Moses, but what of the prophets? Let the one that the Lord Jesus described as “the” prophet be our guide, even Daniel. He is engaged in prayer in Daniel 9, because of the condition of his nation and its royal city, now in ruins. He prays at the time of the evening oblation, but no sacrifice burns on Israel’s altar as he prays, for the Temple is in ruins also. Who can remedy such a situation? Only Messiah the Prince, who will make an end of sins, the sins that brought the desolation of City and Temple, and bring in everlasting righteousness. He alone can purge the earth of its ingrained sin and introduce the reign of right which shall never be over-thrown. No wonder John announces Him as the One who will take away the sin of the world!

Thus in closing these few remarks on passages relating to the Lamb of God’s providing, we notice that in Genesis 22 it is the father that takes the initiative. Yet the son, who to all intents and purposes was the lamb, is willingly involved. In Isaiah 53 wicked men take the initiative and the lamb is prepared to be taken by them to the place of slaughter. Whilst in John 1 the initiative is Christ’s Himself, as He comes into the world. So as we think of the lamb and goat section of Leviticus 1, we are assured that the One of whom it speaks went to the place of sacrifice in fellowship with His Father, in fulfilment of the prophecies of the Old Testament, and even if men counsel together to slaughter Him, we know that they only bring to pass the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God.

What is the difference between a sheep and a goat, considered typically? The word used for sheep here, namely “keseb”, means a he-lamb. Not a “taleh,” a sucking lamb, nor yet a stout he-lamb, a “kar”; and certainly not a “kabsah,” a she-lamb. Yet the word is not the same as is used in Genesis 22:7,8, a “seh” a young lamb of either the sheep or the goats. Thus the emphasis seems to be upon the fact that it is a male. As for the word for goat, “ez”, it has for its meaning a goat or she-goat. In fact the word is translated “she-goat” 5 times. Yet we know that the goat of Leviticus 1 must be a male. Thus again the emphasis seems to be upon the maleness of the animal, for even though the usage of the word allows the idea of a she-goat, the regulations expressly exclude anything but a male.

It was not enough for the would-be offerer to bring the first animal he chanced upon as he entered his flock. Apart from the vital necessity of freedom from blemish, the animal must of necessity be a male, neither ewe or she-goat would be acceptable. The idea lying behind the male in Scripture is that of activity, not passivity, as with the female. This is not to say, of course, that females either amongst the animal kingdom or the race of mankind are inactive. But they are active in a different sort of way.

There is presented to us in the male sheep an illustration of the active, deliberate and resolute subjection of Christ to the Father’s will. He is not simply the meeting-point of influences outside of Himself, such as the enmity of Satan and the world, but one who deliberately sets out to actively do the will of His Father. His words in Gethsemane will serve to bring out the contrast between active submission and passive submission. They are as follows, as found in the Synoptic Gospels:

Matthew 26.39 “O My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from Me: nevertheless not as I will, but as Thou wilt”.
Mark 14.36 “Abba, Father, all things are possible unto Thee; take away this cup from Me: nevertheless not what I will, but what Thou wilt”.
Luke 22.42 “Father, if Thou be willing, remove this cup from Me: nevertheless not My will, but Thine, be done”.

How the reality of the manhood of Christ shines out here! Sincerely and definitely seeking that the awful cup of Divine wrath which was being extended to Him, might in some way be allowed to pass. Yet only if it be the will of His Father so to intervene. Mark’s account makes clear that “the cup” to which the Saviour refers, is the same as the “hour” of His sufferings upon the Cross. Compare Mark 14:35 with verse 36. Such were the horrors of that time that the holy soul of Christ shrank from the enduring of its agonies. Yet, for all that, He expresses His passive submission to the will of His Father.

By contrast, in John’s Gospel that submission is active, the male offering is in view there. Again the scene is Gethsemane, but this time there is no falling to the ground in agony by Christ, overwhelmed by the prospect of the bitter experiences so soon to be His portion. In fact, it is the band of men that have come to arrest Him that fall to the ground, though not in prayer, but in fear. Nor is there any mention of the cup being allowed to pass from Him undrained, but on the contrary there is a rebuke for Peter who by his sword seeks to prevent Him from drinking it. Note the decisive and majestic words, “The cup which My Father hath given Me, shall I not drink it”? John 18:11. This is active submission, deliberately setting out to be subject to the will of the Father and it is this aspect of things which is emphasised throughout John’s Gospel.

But if the sheep was to be a male, so was the goat, so wherein lays their difference? The goat is a more rugged animal than the sheep, the better able to survive under adverse circumstances. It is said that the ancestors of the wild goats that may be found on some of the mountains in Wales were let loose there by the Welsh shepherds. For the goats were able to penetrate into places which would be dangerous to a sheep, and would crop the grass so that the sheep would not be tempted to venture there and then be unable to return. In the Scripture, the goat is associated with adverse circumstances Leviticus 16:22, and adverse decisions, Matthew 25:32,33,41.

We suggest therefore, that the male goat presents to us the idea of active subjection which takes the initiative despite adverse circumstances, whereas the male sheep gives the idea of active subjection which accepts circumstances as they develop, knowing them to be the will of God.

See how this unfolds in John’s Gospel. In chapter 18.4 Jesus went forth to meet the hostile band with their swords and staves and lanterns. This is the ‘goat’ aspect, facing hardship and opposition with determination and resolve. But then we see the ‘sheep’ aspect of His active subjection in verses 12 and 13 as the band took Jesus, bound Him, and led Him away. Thus beginning the fulfilment of the words of Isaiah as quoted in Acts 8:32, “He is led as a lamb to the slaughter”. At one moment He is seen actively taking the initiative, going forth to meet the foe, the next He is allowing Himself to be bound.

What irony lays in the probable fact that the route taken by the soldiers with their prisoner was via the ascent by which Solomon went up to the House of the Lord to offer his ascending offering 1 Kings 10:5, which was one of the sights which caused such wonderment in the heart of the Queen of Sheba. Are not our hearts likewise filled with amazement when we see the ascent by which Christ went up to the place of sacrifice?

Thus He was led to the palace, John 18:12-15; led to the Praetorium, (judgment hall), 18:28; and finally led to ‘the place’, which in fact was Golgotha, “the place of a skull” 19:16, 17. But notice that He goes forth before He is led away in chapter 18, and then in 19:17 He goes forth after He is led away. He shows Himself to be the Beginning and the Ending, the First and the Last; always in command of the situation, confident in the execution of His Father’s will, despite the tremendous cost. Truly He is the he-goat that goeth well and is comely in going, Proverbs 30:29,31.

1:11 And he shall kill it on the side of the altar northward before the Lord: and the priests, Aaron’s sons, shall sprinkle his blood round about upon the altar.

Only of the sheep and the goat is this said, although surely we may assume that it pertained to the other sacrifices also, the bullock and the dove. We have seen already in this chapter the way in which contrasting and yet complementary things are put side by side, and such is the case here. For “the side of the altar northward” suggests one thing, whilst “before the Lord” suggests another. But one that not only harmonises with the first, but enhances it.

All of the points of the compass have certain associations. For instance, the east suggests expectation, for it is the place of the sun’s rise, with all the hopes of the light of day. The west would suggest expansion and enlargement, for it was the furthest extent of the sun’s course and was also the predominant direction in which the Gospel travelled from Jerusalem, in large part amongst the sons of Japheth, whose name means ‘enlargement’ Genesis 10.1-4.

But the north seems to be the place of exposure to danger. It was from the north that danger threatened Israel so often. As Jeremiah said “out of the north an evil shall break forth” 1:14. Then Proverbs 25:23 says “the north wind driveth away rain”. We might think this to be a good thing, but the rest of the verse says “so doth an angry countenance a backbiting tongue.” Again Job 37:22 says “fair weather cometh out of the north: with God is terrible majesty. Again, Psalm 75:6,7 says “promotion cometh neither from the east, nor from the west, nor from the south. But God is the judge: He putteth down one, and setteth up another”.

The underlying thought behind these references to the north is of fore-boding, of terribleness, of exposure to danger, of judgement. Couple with this the fact that the north side of the altar would necessarily be in the shadows, and we have a picture built up of a place of ominous portent. It was this sort of experience that the Lord knew when He was found on the north side of Jerusalem on a cross. Did the enemy come and destroy the Temple in olden times? Then Christ prophesies that the temple of His Body will be destroyed at the cross, John 2:19. Was the ensign lifted up by the tribe of Dan, camped on the north side of the Tabernacle, a serpent? Then Christ would be lifted up in the same way, in accordance with the type of another uplifted serpent, that of Numbers 21. See John 3:14-16.

Whilst the foregoing was true, that the enemy would come, that He would be lifted up, yet there was in the heart of the Son of God the consciousness that He was ever in personal favour with the Father. For in John 2 there is a clear contrast made between Herod’s Temple, defiled and profaned, and the temple of His Body, pure and holy. So whilst the Temple of Old Testament times was destroyed because of the failure of the people, Christ’s Body was brought into the dissolution of death for several reasons, but certainly not for failure on His part.

Whilst it is true that He was lifted up as both the brazen serpent, and the serpent-ensign had been, yet He was never personally anything less than holy. Truly made sin, yet never made to become a sinner or sinful. Always “before the Lord”, even during the three hours of darkness which veiled His deepest anguish; ever the delight of the Father’s heart. A possible hint of this is found in Psalm 22:20. The psalm is in character a sin-offering psalm, beginning as it does with Christ’s experience of being forsaken of God because of sin. But then in verse 20 Christ is heard to say “Deliver my soul from the sword, my darling from the power of the dog”. To what is He referring here? Is it to His own soul, previously mentioned in the verse? Or is it that the Son is speaking of Himself in the language that He knows the Father uses of Him? For the word translated “darling” is elsewhere in the OT translated as “only son”. Its first use is in Genesis 22:2,16 of Isaac, Abraham’s only son, his only-begotten, as Hebrews 11:17 describes Him. Its last use is in Zechariah 12:10, a prophecy of the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus. Thus sensing deeply His relationship with the Father, He speaks as He knows the Father would speak. Just as the fat of the sin offering was not burnt with the rest of the animal upon the ground, but rather was burnt as incense upon the altar of burnt offering, so the fragrance of the devotion and faithfulness of Christ in dealing with sin was associated with His work in gaining acceptance for His people. Thus there is suggested by the thought of the north, and also “before the Lord”, not only the perseverance of Christ under the most severe testing, but also the fact that during all the time of that testing, He was personally delightful to the Father in heaven.

1:12 And he shall cut it into his pieces, with his head and his fat: and the priest shall lay them in order on the wood that is on the fire which is upon the altar:
1:13 But he shall wash the inwards and the legs with water: and the priest shall bring it all, and burn it upon the altar: it is a burnt sacrifice, an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the Lord.

One further point of difference, although perhaps a slight one, might be mentioned, as we bring these remarks on the sheep and goat section to a close. In the case of the bullock, “the priest shall burn all”, but in the case of the sheep or goat, “the priest shall bring it all”. Of course, all the sheep was burnt and all the bullock was brought, but special mention is made of burning on the one hand and bringing on the other. Thus the expressions used fit in with the particular emphasis in each section. The bullock tells of One wholly given up to God’s interests, therefore it is “burn all”. Whereas the sheep and the goat tell of One who pressed towards the place of sacrifice, and would not be turned back, hence, “bring all”. It is well with the Lord’s people when they are wholly given up to their Father’s interests and walk in ways that give Him pleasure. See 1 Thessalonians 4:1.

The Burnt Offering: Part 2

Leave a reply

THE BURNT OFFERING: PART 2

THE WORDS OF THE BIBLE, THE CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURES, AS FOUND IN THE BOOK OF LEVITICUS CHAPTER 1, VERSES 4 TO 9.

1:4 And he shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt offering; and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him. 1:5 And he shall kill the bullock before the Lord: and the priests, Aaron’s sons, shall bring the blood, and sprinkle the blood round about upon the altar that is by the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.
1:6 And he shall flay the burnt offering, and cut it into his pieces.
1:7 And the sons of Aaron the priest shall put fire upon the altar, and lay the wood in order upon the fire:
1:8 And the priests, Aaron’s sons, shall lay the parts, the head, and the fat, in order upon the wood that is on the fire which is upon the altar:
1:9 But his inwards and his legs shall he wash in water: and the priest shall burn all on the altar, to be a burnt sacrifice, an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the Lord.

1:4 And he shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt offering; and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him.

Two grand truths are made known in this verse, namely, identification with the sacrifice, and acceptance by means of the sacrifice. The identification is suggested by the laying on of the hand. We see this in principle in Acts 8:14-17, where Peter and John make the journey from Jerusalem to Samaria expressly to lay their hands upon those who had recently believed in that country, and thereby to publicly associate with them on behalf of the Jewish Christians. The Jews as a nation had no dealings with the Samaritans, John 4:9, but in Christ national barriers and prejudices are broken down. So we read of Peter, the apostle to the Jews, going down to Samaria to lay hands upon the Samaritans, to show that there remains no historical enmity. And John goes with him to show that there is no personal enmity; for it was John and his brother James who had wanted to call down fire upon the Samaritans in Luke 9:51-54 because of their hostility to the Lord. Now this attitude was gone, and instead of fire from heaven, there is the Holy Spirit from heaven as the apostles lay hands upon the Samaritans.

The same idea of identification is found in Acts 9:17, where Ananias lays hands upon Saul of Tarsus and his sight is restored. Saul would have laid hands on Ananias in a very different way before he was saved! But now they are brothers in the Lord, and the one is identified with the other.

Thus it is that the offerer, as he lays his hand upon the head of the offering, is identified with it. The result being that the acceptableness of the offering is credited to the offerer. In the case of the sin offering the process was reversed, for then the sinfulness of the offerer was attributed to the offering, which was then slaughtered and consumed out of God’s sight, together with its burden of sin.

Paul brings these two thoughts together in 2 Corinthians 5:21, 6:1,2. He writes, “God hath made Him to be sin for us”, and then declares, “now is the accepted time”, or time of acceptance. Those who personally identify themselves with the Lord Jesus, have attributed to them all the acceptableness of Christ in the sight of His Father. Contrariwise, they find that all their sin, which made them so unacceptable in the sight of God, has been attributed to Christ when upon the cross, and He has finally dealt with that sin to God’s entire satisfaction.

But how is this identification, with its blessed results, brought about? The clue is found in the meaning of the word “put”, for it means to lean; thus faith is suggested, a leaning upon the sacrifice, a reliance upon it, for blessing. Romans 5:2 declares that believers have access by faith into the grace wherein they stand, and this way of faith is the only avenue to blessing, being God’s appointed way for men. But how hard it is for man to realise this; how much rather would he seek to rely upon himself and his own efforts. But this is an impossible task, as the following Scriptures make clear:
“Therefore by the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified in His sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin”, Romans 3:20.
“Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ”, Galatians 2:16.
“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast,” Ephesians 2:8,9.
For we ourselves were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving diverse lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another. But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, not by works of righteousness that we have done, but according to His mercy he saved us,” Titus 3:3-5.

Not only is it an impossible task, but it is one which God has cursed, for He has said “Cursed be the man that trusteth in man,” Jeremiah 17:5. Despite this, man would rather lean upon good works, church-going, sincere intentions and suchlike, but fulness of blessing is only found in the sacrificial work of Christ at the cross of Calvary, where, concerned for the honour of God, and the salvation of the sons of men, He gave up His life in sacrificial death. May the writer of these pages urge any one of his readers who does not personally know God’s Son and the salvation that is available through Him, to earnestly consider these matters in the light of the Scriptures. Rest assured that the Lord is “rich unto all that call upon Him. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved,” Romans 10:12,13.

Note the result of being identified with the person of Christ and His sacrifice. It is nothing less than full acceptance in the sight of God. Ephesians 1:6 speaks of believers as being “accepted in the Beloved”. The inspired apostle does not say “accepted in Christ”, or “in the Lord Jesus”, although that would be a precious thing, but rather “in the Beloved”. This title emphasises the love that exists between the Father and the Son and it is in that sort of atmosphere of love that the believer finds acceptance with God. And not only so, but all that the Father finds delightful about His Son is attributed to the believer, in the gracious dealings of God.

The word “accepted” as used in Leviticus 1:4, may also very well be translated “be pleased with”. Hence when the word came from heaven to Christ as He emerged from the waters of the Jordan, “this is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased,” Mathew 3:17, He was marked out by God as the One He fully accepted. The words came to distinguish Him from all others, even though they had come to John to repent and be baptised. It is not to these that the word from heaven comes, even though God had said through the psalmist “the saints that are in the earth…in whom is all my delight,” Psalm 16:3. There is One who is fairer than these and He receives the Divine approval of thirty private years, as the word from heaven comes to Him, and to Him alone.

In Matthew 12:14-21 the Beloved is found amongst the Pharisees who criticise His work. But Matthew is able to quote God‘s words through Isaiah, “Behold My servant,” for He is doing the works of Him that sent Him. If they seek to drag Him down, God says “whom I uphold”. If men vote for His death, God says “Mine elect”, and if they condemn and complain, God says, “In whom My soul delighteth”. Thus His Father counteracts and contradicts the wicked dealings of scornful men with regard to His Beloved.

Another instance of God’s relationship with His Beloved is found in Luke 9.28-36. There upon the Mount of Transfiguration, the Lord is found amongst the saints, both of the Old and New Testaments. Each of them had a strong character, Moses being renowned for his meekness and faithfulness, Elijah for his determination and persistence, Peter for his zeal and energy, James and John, the sons of thunder, for their strong feelings and their patience in suffering. To none of these does the word “I am well pleased” come, only to Christ, who excelled them all in these characteristics. Each of them had unusual features about their death. Moses, for instance, (who should have taken the people into the land), had died and been buried by God outside the lan, because of his disobedience to the command of God, Deuteronomy 34:5,6. But Christ died in obedience, John 10:18; Romans 5:19 and subsequently entered in to the place to which He shall at last bring His people, even heaven itself. Elijah had a remarkable exodus from this world, for “there appeared a chariot of fire…and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven,” 2 Kings 2:11. But still it remains true, that “no man hath ascended up to heaven, but He that came down from heaven, even the Son of Man which is in heaven,” John 3:13. For there is all the difference between being rapt to heaven by Divine power, as Elijah, and ascending of one’s own authority, as Christ. Then again, the death of Peter was described by the Saviour Himself in John 21:18,19, as the death of an old man, and unwilling, in contrast to His own, which, although in the midst of His years, was one to which He pressed willingly. And as for James and John who declared they could drink of the cup of suffering that Christ would drink, and be baptised with His baptism, they could certainly be the first to say that their Saviour suffered much more than they could have endured. No wonder it was His decease that they spoke of upon the mountain!

Then again, Moses and Elijah represent the Law and the prophets through whom God had spoken in the Old Testament, whilst Peter, James and John represent the writers of the New Testament. But despite their importance in this connection, the command, “Hear Him” comes from heaven with regard to Christ alone, for the voice of the prophets in both Old and New Testaments, and the voice of the Law are His voice. No wonder that when Peter sought to put the Lord on the same level as Moses and Elijah by making them each a tabernacle, the bright cloud overshadowed them and “they saw no man, save Jesus only,” Matthew 17:8.

In the instances cited, then, the Beloved is separated from either the saints or the scorning sinners by the approving word from heaven. In Ephesians 1:6, however, He is deliberately associated by God with His people. They find themselves sharing the acceptance that God’s Son enjoys with His Father. And all this as a result of His sacrificial death on their behalf, for the apostle goes on to write of “redemption through His blood”, Ephesians 1:7.

1:5 And he shall kill the bullock before the Lord: and the priests, Aaron’s sons, shall bring the blood, and sprinkle the blood round about upon the altar that is by the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.

The idea behind the word atonement is that of cover or shelter Thus the animal sacrifice is said to cover or shelter the one who offers it. Having sinned, Adam and his wife realised that they were no longer what they had been, or what they might have been, for they sought to cover themselves with aprons of fig leaves and to shelter amongst the trees of the garden. But they were taught of God that there was only one way to be covered and sheltered, as He made for them two coats from one skin, sacrifice having been made, Genesis 3:7,8,21. In this way they learned that only by means of a life laid down on their behalf could they be acceptable in the Divine Presence. But the coats of skin are only an illustration of the character and excellencies of Christ which were manifested perfectly in His life, and attributed to believers because of His death for them.

There were three vital parts to any animal sacrifice, and they find their counterpart in the sacrifice of Christ. There was the killing of the animal, the consequent shedding of blood, and then the burning in the fire. Because of his shortcomings, (and all come short of the glory of God, Romans 3:23), the life of the offerer had been forfeited, and he had no right to continue to live upon the earth. He therefore needs to bring an animal that will die instead of him, that he might continue upon the earth The man’s past, however, has still not been dealt with, for although the animal has died his death, his shortcomings are still on God’s record and “God requireth that which is past” Ecclesiastes 3:15. Hence blood needs to be shed in atonement on his behalf. But if the animal victim is to be accepted as his substitute, then it must be able to endure the fiery test of the flames of Divine Holiness; for if God is going to accept the offering, and through it the person of the offerer, then He must do so on a holy basis. We often forget the intensity of Divine Holiness, that infinite separateness from all that is evil. In Isaiah’s vision, in chapter six of his prophecy, just the mention of the subject of God’s holiness by one seraph to another was enough to make the posts of the doors of the temple move. If then those flames of holiness can feed upon the parts that have been laid upon the altar, and if the smoke of the burning is one of sweet-savour, with no noxious fumes intermingling, then indeed Divine holiness is satisfied, and Divine requirements have been met.

Now what was foreshadowed at the altar, was fulfilled at Calvary. For Christ has died, his blood has been shed, and He has been exposed to the fires of God’s Holiness. And not only so, has risen again to impart the blessings of His death to those who believe. Christ has died on behalf of His people, so that instead of being swept away from the earth as sinners in Adam, they might continue before God as believers in Christ.

In addition, the blood of Christ has been shed. And that pure and holy soul of the Lord Jesus has been poured out unto death, without reserve, Isaiah 53:12 declared it would. The life (soul) of the flesh is in the blood Leviticus 17:11, and at last there was One found who was without fault, and whose life given up in sacrifice on behalf of others could be acceptable in the sight of God.

But there is more still, for the Son of God was subjected to the searching flame of Divine Holiness, with the result that there ascended to God an odour of a sweet smell, delighting His heart, and with which He could be satisfied. Strange it is, but nonetheless true, that even whilst the Saviour was accomplishing the work of sin-bearing, He was still the object of His Father’s deepest affection, continuing to be the Only-begotten in the bosom of the Father, with nothing changed as to His eternal relationship to God.

We must not think that because the Lord Jesus is said by the Scriptures to have been made sin, that this means He became a sinner, or sinful. Far be the thought! The sin-offering is expressly said to be holy; in fact, “most holy,” Leviticus 6:25,29. These words are also used to describe the innermost sanctuary of the Tabernacle. If the animal sacrifice was holy, how much more so the One who it prefigured. There was never a moment when the Lord Jesus was personally unholy, even when He was bearing the heavy load of others’ sins. So whilst God’s fiery anger consumed the sin-offering together with its accompanying sin, yet it is also true that the same fire, searching and penetrating as it was, only served to bring out the acceptableness of the burnt offering. The same fires of Divine holiness which burnt against Christ at Calvary, also served to bring out the acceptableness of His person.

Notice that the three things we have mentioned are all said to have taken place under the close scrutiny of the Lord. For the killing is “before the Lord”. The blood is said to be “sprinkled round about upon the altar,” and the parts are laid upon the altar to be consumed by the flame, and this altar is “before the Lord,” Leviticus 16:18. How reassuring to the offerer as he looked back to the occasion when he brought his sacrifice, that all had met the approval of the Divine gaze, and all had been found acceptable when tested. And how reassuring also to the believer who looks back to Calvary and sees a work which in all its aspects was acceptable in the sight of God. He need not fear that some matter has been overlooked, and when noticed will be dealt with in the future. The Scripture is clear about the sacrifice of Christ at Calvary, that “by one offering He hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified,” Hebrews 10:14.

With the burnt offering everything was upward in its tendency. The parts of the animal were lifted up upon the altar, the blood was sprinkled round about upon the altar, (and the altar being about three cubits high, this would be at eye-level), and the smoke and savour arose heavenwards. Interestingly, the altar of burnt offering was three cubits high, and three times in John’s gospel the death of Christ is spoken of as a lifting up, John 3:14: 8:28; 12:32. But with the sin-offering things were different, for the animal was burnt upon the ground, the blood was poured out upon the ground, and the flame descended to consume out of sight the offending article, sin. So there were these two aspects to the death of the Lord Jesus. In one sense His death was part of the journey back to heaven, His leaving of the world to go to the Father, John 16:28. And in another sense He was “brought into the dust of death,” Psalm 22:15, and “laid in the lowest pit, in darkness, in the deeps,” Psalm 88:6.

1:6 And he shall flay the burnt offering, and cut it into his pieces.

Next the offerer is commanded to skin the animal, and later we learn that the skin is to be the portion of the priest that offers the sacrifice on the part of the Israelite, Leviticus 7:8. The skin of the sin-offering was burnt with the rest of its flesh, so that apart from the fat that was burnt upon the altar, all was done away. In the case of the burnt offering, on the other hand, there is that which remains to be used by the priest subsequently, so that the desire of the individual offerer to present a sacrifice not only gratifies God and is the means of the man’s acceptance, but it goes towards the maintenance of the priesthood. We note from 1 Peter 2:5 that all who are born again are priests to God, so in the present era the offerer and the priest are one and the same person, engaged in the presentation of spiritual sacrifices, not animal ones. We can easily see from these things that the spiritual exercises and desires of the individual believer all tend to the maintenance and development of priestliness, so that, when met together as a holy priesthood, the sense of having a share in what has satisfied God’s heart so fills the soul with gratitude, that true and fervent worship is fostered. May it be that our personal exercises result in something which we can value as priests, and which we may make our own. To think that we are allowed to share God’s thoughts about His Son!

Note that the priest took to himself only that skin which was from the animal he had dealt with, as we learn from Leviticus 7:8. Spirituality is not contagious. Nor can it be developed by another on our behalf. It can and must come only through intense and disciplined exercise of heart, as 1 Timothy 4:6-16 indicates. One of the reasons why there may be barrenness at the gatherings for worship, is that there has not been during the previous days the development of spiritual qualities. Let us not think that godliness is some sort of mantle that may be put on at the entrance to the meeting-place. We may assume pious attitudes and use pious expressions, but the God with whom we have to do reads the heart. He hates hypocrisy, the putting on of a mask of respectability and pseudo-spirituality, and His word to the hypocrite now is the same as it was in the days of Christ’s flesh “Woe unto you…hypocrites!” Mattew 23:13.

The word used for “flay” in Leviticus 1:6 is the same as that which is used of the “stripping” of Joseph’s coat of many colours from him, Genesis 37:23. Alas, there have been, and are, those ready to strip the coat of many colours from the Greater than Joseph. They have no appreciation of the varied features of the character of Christ, which like Joseph’s coat, mark Him out as the firstborn, the beloved of His Father, Genesis 37:3; 48:22; 1 Chronicles 5:2. There were those like this at Colosse, calling themselves Gnostics, “knowing ones”, who sought to deprive Christ of His distinctive glories and unique character. Paul responds positively to their evil threat by reminding the Colossian believers of the titles which belong exclusively to the Lord Jesus, such as God’s dear Son, Image, Firstborn, Creator, Upholder, Head, The Beginning, the Pre-eminent One, the One in Whom dwells all fulness, Colossians 1:12-19. A coat of many colours indeed!

But it was with different intentions that the offerer stripped the hide from his bullock. This action began the process of exposing the inner perfections of the animal, so that every part might be tested by the flame of the altar. If all met with Divine approval, then the man was accepted in the value of his substitute. We may be sure that what was true of the man’s bullock, is also gloriously true of the Lord Jesus, for no part of His person needs to be hidden from view, no part of His life fails to meet with God’s full and unreserved approval. There were no aspects of the person of Christ that were unacceptable, and it is in the value of such an offering that the believer has God’s full and unreserved approval too.

1:7 And the sons of Aaron the priest shall put fire upon the altar, and lay the wood in order upon the fire:

Next we come to a part of the ceremony needing a considerable degree of intelligence and skill, to so separate the parts of the offering that they might be exposed to view upon the altar for the eye of God. By this means the inner excellence of the animal was revealed. Externally there must be no blemish, but there must be corresponding perfection internally also. Whilst there might be many animals able to stand this test, there was only one person. Only He could utter the words of Psalm 139:23,24 with perfect freedom. The psalmist had said, “Search me, O God, and know my heart: try me, and know my thoughts:” All, including the psalmist, would have to admit to grievous shortcomings after such an examination, but not the Lord Jesus.

What a privilege to come as worshippers to the Father and “rejoice in Christ Jesus,” Philippians 3:3; to have that spiritual intelligence to speak to Him concerning the varied aspects of His matchless person. Not that God does not already know, of course, but He delights to have the appreciation of His people. As Joseph said, “Ye shall tell my father of all my glory,” Genesis 45:13. Laban’s sons reckoned glory in terms of what a man had acquired for himself Genesis 31:1. (The only other mention of glory in the book of Genesis which covers over two thousand years of human history). But Joseph’s glory lay in what he was able to be and do for others, as the ‘saviour of the world’, the meaning of his name in Genesis 41:45.
This exercise cannot be carried out mechanically, but must be spontaneous, and the outcome of a life lived in the enjoyment of what Christ truly is. Contemplating Him with holy wonder, we shall develop in the heavenly art of appreciating His varied features, each one of which is finely balanced and perfectly integrated with the other. We shall never find a flaw or a short-coming in Him of whom the Father said, “in whom I am well-pleased”. Looking within, the Father saw everything that He sought for in the way of moral excellence.

The fire of the altar was never to go out, Leviticus 6:13. So what are we to understand by the putting of fire upon the altar? Is it not that the priest was to bring burning embers onto a vacant space on the altar ready for the burning of the sacrifice? Exodus 27:3 speaks of the fire-pans and the shovels by which this may have been done. This was a holy exercise, to handle fire which had originally come down from heaven from God. It was not something to be done lightly, with a careless attitude. Even the seraphim in God’s presence cannot directly handle the fire of the altar, but must needs use tongs, Isaiah 6:6. Should not the Christian priest therefore fear lest he become over-familiar in the presence of God? Let us remember that He who is equal to the Father ascribed holiness to God in the words, “Holy Father,” John 17:11. Is this not the prime example of the way to handle the fire of Divine Holiness? Christians should respond to that word, “Let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear: For our God is a consuming fire,” Hebrews 12:29.

Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, found that God was indeed a consuming fire, for when they offered that which was strange in the presence of God, then “there went out fire from the Lord, and devoured them,” Leviticus 10:2. They had erred in the use of fire and paid the price for so doing. And let us not think that because we live in an age marked by grace, that we may abuse our priestly position by not giving God the reverence due to His Holy Name. Our God is, (not just was in the law-age), a consuming fire. A case in point is the use of “You and Yours” in addressing Deity. If there were no alternative in the English language whereby the Person of God could be sanctified in our speaking, then there might be an excuse. But in fact the practise of addressing God with the words “Thee and Thou” is one which is easily learned, and presents no real difficulty to the spiritual mind. The same principle applies to the use of so-called translations of the Scriptures which adopt the modern form of address to God. For this reason, and for other strong reasons besides, they should be whole-heartedly jettisoned by all who wish to sanctify the Lord God in their hearts. Of course, patience may have to be exercised with regard to those newly saved, or those who have previously met with those who are not particular about these things, but patience must not be allowed to degenerate into indifference.

But if the fire came down from heaven, the wood grew up on the earth. Nonetheless it was valued by God, for in Nehemiah 10:34 it is described as a wood offering. May we suggest that the wood represents those spiritual thoughts of Christ that are available when worship in engaged in, so that the fires of true devotion may be kept burning? There were those in Israel who were known as hewers of wood Joshua 9:27. May the Lord increase the number of their spiritual counterparts, who consider it their duty to see that the fire continually burns. Such will need to renounce worldly ambitions and hopes of financial gain, but may be assured that nothing which they do to further God’s interests will be forgotten by Him “who is not unrighteous to forget,” Hebrews 6:10.

After his humbling experience when he had proudly numbered Israel, David reared up an altar on the threshing-floor of Araunah, 2 Samuel 24, where the hand of the destroying angel was stayed, and he sacrificed the oxen to the Lord, using the threshing instruments as wood for the fire. These he refused to accept as a gift from Araunah, but said, “neither will I offer burnt offerings unto the Lord my God of that which doth cost me nothing”. An important principle this, and one we would do well to follow, by ensuring that a sacrifice is really a sacrifice.

Proverbs 26:20 says that “where no wood is, there the fire goeth out”, and how sadly this may be true in the lives and gatherings of the Lord’s people. It will not be the case if there is a constant and diligent study of the Scriptures, our only source of material if our minds are to be stocked with that which will please our Father as we draw near in worship. The adoption of a regularised ritual, and of man-appointed ‘leaders of worship’, or extensive singing, is surely no substitute for the fresh thoughts of Christ which the Spirit of God is so ready to impart to the one desirous of such things, John 16:14.

1:8 And the priests, Aaron’s sons, shall lay the parts, the head, and the fat, in order upon the wood that is on the fire which is upon the altar:

Note the reversal of the order of the words in the mention of the priests in verses 7 and 8. In the one instance it is “the sons of Aaron the priest”, whilst in the other they are described as “the priests, Aaron’s sons”. In the one their descent as sons is in view, in the other their dignity as priests is emphasised. These two things are presented to us by the apostle Peter as he writes about the Christian priesthood in his first epistle. He uses various expressions which lead us to think of these two aspects of the believer as a priest. For instance, in the first chapter, he writes of “being begotten again,” verse 3, of “obedient children,” verse 14, of “calling on the Father,” verse 17, of “being born again, not of corruptible seed (offspring), but of incorruptible,” verse 23, and in the second chapter of “new-born babes,” verse 2, and of a “chosen generation,” verse 9.

We learn from these phrases, coming as they do in the context which deals with Christian priests, that all who are truly born again are priests unto God, without exception. How successful has Satan been for so long! Centuries of the Christian era have rolled their course and the generally accepted idea amongst the ranks of professed believers has been that priesthood is the reserve of the clergy, who act for the laity in the presence of God. This is not Christianity in action, it is Judaism, with pagan overtones. No doubt through the age there have always been those who have appreciated the truth, and have enjoyed ministering to the heart of God in private, but the public image of Christianity has been one of a priestly class acting vicariously for others.

There is no need for any of us in our day to follow the trend. We need to clear our minds of any notion that the ordinary believer is under-privileged and has no right to act in God’s presence without assistance. As believers we need to ensure that the circumstances in which we meet for worship do in fact foster the free exercise of our birthright.

As we have suggested, priesthood is not only a matter of descent, but of dignity also. So we find Peter describing priests as “laying aside all malice,” 1 Peter 2:1, as “chosen”, “royal” and “holy”, and as “a peculiar people,” (that is, a people for God’s own possession), and as those who “show forth the praises of Him who hath called you out of darkness into His marvellous light, 1 Peter 2:9. Darkness surrounded the top of Sinai when the Law was given, Hebrews 12:18, but believers have not been called by God into darkness, but rather, have been invited to draw near into the marvellous light of His glorious presence. What more dignified position could possibly be given them? And not only this, they have the holy privilege of seeking to display His excellencies. Priests under the law wore garments of glory and beauty, Exodus 28:40. How much more should priests under grace “put on the Lord Jesus Christ,” Romans 13:14, having “put off all malice,” 1 Peter 2:1. So shall His glory and beauty be displayed in this world of shame and dishonour.

So it is that in the full dignity of their office the priests handle the sacrifice and lay the parts in order. The two parts mentioned in this verse being the head and the fat. The head is that member which controls the rest of the body and therefore speaks of the mind and the intelligence, whereas the fat of an animal constitutes its stored-up reserves of energy. The word used for “fat” is not the same word as is used in connection with the peace offering, where particular concentrations of fat in the body of the animal are in view, but rather, the grease which occurs throughout the entire body. So we have in these two items that which affects the whole of the rest of the body. The mind governing the action and reaction of every part and the fat supplying reserves of energy to the whole.
Do we not see in Christ the perfect combination of intelligence and energy? His was no “zeal without knowledge” Romans 10:2, but He was ever governed by an intelligent insight into the will of His Father. How often we read in John’s Gospel of “Jesus knowing” and such references as John 2:24; 3:11; 4:1; 5:6; 6:15; 7:29; 8:14; 11:42; 13:1,3; 13:11; 18:4; 19:28, would well repay further study. The basis of this awareness was His knowledge of the Father Himself. John’s testimony was that “no man hath seen God at any time; the Only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him,” John 1:18. The verb John uses means to see with the eye or with the mind and both these meanings find their place here. For it is certainly true that no man has physically seen God at any time, nor has gained full insight into the nature of God, but this Christ claims to have, as the Only-begotten of the Father. In His earthly ministry He imparted this knowledge through the words He spoke, telling men things about God of which the Law could never have informed them, see John 1:17. As the Only Begotten in the Father‘s bosom He tells out the heart of God, and as the Word, He tells out God‘s mind. It is this knowledge of the Father that governed the activities of the Lord Jesus, as in the language of the type we are considering, the head and the fat were together. May the Lord grant that as His people, in our measure, we may combine knowledge with action, that Mary-like, we may sit at His feet and learn of Him, and Martha-like, may busy ourselves in service for Him, Luke 10:38-42.

Let us never despise knowledge. It is true that the apostle Paul wrote “knowledge puffeth up,” 1 Corinthians 8:1, but the context will show that he meant knowledge without love. May the apostle’s prayer for the Ephesians be answered in us too, that the Spirit of God in His character as the Spirit of wisdom and revelation, may so affect us, that the eyes of our understanding may be enlightened, as we develop in the knowledge of Himself, Ephesians 1:17,18. The word the apostle used for “enlightened” is the one from which the English language derives ‘to photograph’. Just as light passes through the ‘eye’ or lens of a camera onto the sensitive film at the back, producing an impression of the object focussed upon, so believers, as they concentrate on the things of God and as they allow the Spirit to do His work of revealing Divine things, 1 Corinthians 2:9,10, will find that their souls are flooded with the light of the knowledge of God, and permanent impressions are thereby produced.

A further lesson is apparent from the verse under consideration, for we read that the head and the fat were to be laid in order. Does this not mean, in the absence of any indication otherwise, that these items were to be arranged on the altar in the same way as they were distributed through the animal’s body? Thus there was a Divine order about the sacrifice as it lay upon the altar, for the Creator of the animal had distributed the parts as He willed, and now they are found in that same order in sacrifice. It is well for Christian worshippers if they are able to intelligently review the person of Christ in God’s presence so that He is reminded afresh of those features in the life of Christ which were found there in an order and arrangement which satisfied His desire. This order was never disturbed, not even in death, for whilst all around there was uproar and turmoil, there was a calm repose about the bearing of the Lord Jesus, even when He was under the most extreme pressure of abuse, injustice and pain. Never at any time were Divine principles jettisoned, or Divine commands flouted. Always there was an energetic accomplishment of the will of His Father, in accordance with His perfect insight into that will as the Son.

Thus the fat that the animal would ‘burn up’ to supply it with energy during life, is now burnt up upon the altar to assist the action of the fire. Correspondingly, the energy of the life and ministry of Christ are matched by the enthusiasm of His sacrificial death. In fact, one of the words used in the New Testament for sacrifice is “thusia”, from which comes the English word for enthusiasm.

Again two parts of the animal are mentioned together, one being internal, the other external. In this respect they are like the head and the fat. Every aspect of the person of Christ was alike pleasing and acceptable to His Father, whether during thirty largely secret years or three and a half years of public ministry. Whether days of preaching and healing, or nights of praying. Whether closeted with His own in the Upper Room, or discoursing amongst the throng in the Temple Courts. Whether welcomed by the multitude with their hosannas, or hounded to death with their blood-thirsty cry. The ‘unseen years’ were pleasing to God, for at the end of them the word of approval came to Christ on the banks of the Jordan. And the public years were alike satisfying to God’s heart, for again there came the word from heaven to the Lord when He was upon the “holy mount”. His death too, met with Divine approval for He was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, Romans 6:4. The Father’s glory demanded that such a person be raised from the dead.

1:9 But his inwards and his legs shall he wash in water: and the priest shall burn all on the altar, to be a burnt sacrifice, an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the Lord.

What are we to glean from the fact that the water needed to be applied to both inwards and legs in the burnt offering, thus cleansing away any defilement that would make it unfit to offer? Was there defilement with Christ that needed to be washed away before He was acceptable as a sacrifice? Far be the thought! The reverse is the case, for He was “ready to die from His youth up,” Psalm 88:15. John the Baptist could look upon Jesus as He walked and say “Behold the Lamb of God!” for He was fit and ready even then, although the right time had not come. Peter, John and Paul when they allude to the sinlessness of Christ, do so in connection with His sacrificial work. “Who his own self bare our sins in His own body on the tree”, “Who did no sin” 1 Peter 2:24,22. “And ye know that He was manifested to take away our sins; and in Him is no sin” 1 John 3:5. “For He hath made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin,” 2 Corinthians 5:21. So the writers of the New Testament are united in their testimony regarding the sinlessness of the appointed sacrifice.

So what is the washing indicating to us, since it is not the idea that Christ had defilement needing to be purged? It is the lesson of contrast. When the animal provides a comparison with the person of Christ, then we may draw the comparison, but when a certain detail, because of the nature of things, supplies contrast, then the lesson must be drawn from contrast. We see this done constantly in the Epistle to the Hebrews, with its inspired commentary on the Levitical system. For instance, Aaron and Christ are both spoken of as priests, and as such are compared. But they are also contrasted, for whilst Aaron was of the Levitical order, Christ’s priesthood is after the order of Melchizedek. Again, both the bodies of animals and the body of the Lord Jesus are spoken of as sacrifices, thus affording interesting comparisons, but they are also seen in sharp contrast, both in nature and effect.

Applying this principle, what do we learn? The ceremonial washing of the animal was to make it typically, what Christ was actually. He alone of all men that have walked upon the earth was both inwardly and outwardly pure. He was no whited sepulchre, appearing beautiful outwardly, but within full of dead men’s bones and of all uncleanness, Matthew 23:27. No defilement found its rise in His heart, nor could the pollution of this wicked world gain an entry from without. Conceived in the virgin Mary by the action of the Holy Spirit, He was free from that fallen nature which all other men inherit from their federal head Adam. Free also from the state of sin which possession of that fallen nature entailed, and free from its tendency to sin.

So it was that the “Holy thing” which was born of Mary was called the Son of God, being totally separate from this world, Luke 1:34,35. Whilst all other men are “of this world,” He was “not of this world,” John 8:23, not sharing its corrupt life, not “of it” in any sense at all. This truth has its implications for believers as well, for the Lord Himself described believers as “not of the world, even as I am not of the world,” John 17:14. Crucified with Christ to cut them off from the life of Adam’s world, and born from above to give them a share in the life of heaven, they have the joy of fellowship with the Father, and with His Son, Jesus Christ, Romans 6:6; Galatians 2:20; 1 John 1:1-4.

The Burnt Offering: Part 1

Leave a reply

“For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; And the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.” Hosea 6:6.

“And this is life eternal, that they might know Thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom Thou hast sent.” John 17:3.

INTRODUCTION
“But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; and that from a child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.”

These are the words of the apostle Paul to Timothy, his son in the faith, as recorded in 2 Timothy 3:14-17. The Scriptures referred to in particular are those of the Old Testament, which the Lord Jesus explained to His disciples on the road to Emmaus- “And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, He expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.” Luke 24:27. Such was the effect of the unfolding of the Scriptures, that with hearts burning with love to Christ, they retraced their steps with a resolve to communicate their new-found knowledge and understanding to those of like mind.

Thus whether it be to make wise unto salvation, to instruct the unlearned, to fully equip the man of God, or to rejoice the heart, the Scriptures are truly profitable. May it be that the Christ of whom they testify, John 5:39, may become increasingly precious to all who may read these words.

THE WORDS OF THE BIBLE, THE CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURES, AS FOUND IN THE BOOK OF LEVITICUS CHAPTER 1, VERSES 1 TO 3

1:1 And the Lord called unto Moses, and spake unto him out of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying,
1:2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man of you bring an offering unto the Lord, ye shall bring your offering of the cattle, even of the herd, and of the flock.
1:3 If his offering be a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish: he shall offer it of his own voluntary will at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the Lord.

SETTING OF THE CHAPTER
Leviticus chapter 1 is the beginning of a book in which God set out the way in which He desired the nation of Israel to serve Him. In chapters 25-40 of the preceding Book of Exodus, God had given details to Moses as to the construction of a Tabernacle, a holy building in which Israel’s priests were to function before Him. It is from this now-completed tabernacle that the Lord speaks to Moses, who, as the people’s representative and mediator, was responsible to pass on God’s requirements. This he did in the form of the Book of Leviticus.

STRUCTURE OF THE CHAPTER
This is very simple, for the passage may be divided into three. The first section, verses 1-9, is concerned with the offering of bullocks, the second, verses 10-13, with the offering of sheep and goats, the third, verses 14-17, with the offering of doves and pigeons.

SECTION 1 VERSES 1-9 THE OFFERING FROM THE HERD

1:1 And the Lord called unto Moses, and spake unto him out of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying,

Thus begins this most important and instructive portion of Scripture. The nation of Israel was described as God’s son, Hosea 11:1, and when He was about to call that son out of Egypt, He said to Pharaoh through Moses, “Let My son go, that he may serve Me,” Exodus 4:23. Having been called out of Egypt by blood and by power, the aspiration of Israel was expressed in the words of their song, “He is my God, and I will prepare Him a habitation,” Exodus 15:2. They made good their intention, and the tabernacle was built, and the glory of the Lord filled the place.

It was from such a glory-filled sanctuary that God called Israel again, this time for worship. If they respond to this call, it must be in a way which satisfies God’s glory, for there is no room left in the tabernacle for man’s glory. As the psalmist would say centuries later, “in His temple doth every one speak of His glory”, Psalm 29:9. Only by taking heed to the Divine instructions will Israel offer “an offering in righteousness”, Malachi 3:3.

Christians too, have been “called out.” Not from a particular country, as Israel was, but from the world-system into which they were born, that they might offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ, 1 Peter 2:5. The epistle to the Hebrews describes Israelites as they came near to the altar with their sacrifices, as worshippers, 10:1,2. Thus there is a very real connection between sacrifices and worship. The Lord Jesus Himself said “But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship Him.” John 4:23. It ought to be the concern of every true believer therefore to seek to satisfy this desire of His Father’s heart. The Lord still calls; this time from the heavenly sanctuary, that His purged worshippers may bring to Him their appreciation of His Son. Let us remember that solemn word from the Lord: “None shall appear before Me empty,” Exodus 23:15.

1:2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man of you bring an offering unto the Lord, ye shall bring your offering of the cattle, even of the herd, and of the flock.

We must acquaint ourselves, when considering this and subsequent verses, with the differing characters of the offerings detailed in Leviticus chapters 1-7. Their order is significant. First of all comes the Burnt Offering, of which no part was eaten, and then follow the Meat or Meal Offering, the Peace Offering and the Sin Offering. Standing at the head of the list, therefore, is the offering that did not build up the offerer, but which was wholly for God. And thus an important lesson is emphasised, for God’s demands must be paramount in all Christian activity, whether worship, walk, or work. He alone has the right to dominate the affairs of the believer, to impose Himself, to accumulate honour, to draw attention to Himself. No saint, however well-known, has the right to do these things, and he attempts to so assert himself at his spiritual peril, for “pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall,” Proverbs 16:18.
All of our intentions and actions must be governed by the truth expressed by God in the words, “My glory will I not give to another” Isaiah 42:8. He is a jealous God; jealous for His people’s allegiance and their full attention. He has the right to claim all for Himself, and this He did in olden times in the burnt offering. All, that is, except the skin of the animal. And the exception proves the rule. For what is the skin of an animal if it is not the outward display of inner excellence? Did not the gloss, the sheen, the rich texture of the coat of the animal indicate inner well-being, glowing good health, freedom from infirmity? Truly the perfection of the animal found its expression in the skin. So even when a priest took the skin of the burnt offering, as we read he did in Leviticus 7:8, he was not really taking anything for himself; he was, on the contrary, acknowledging his own personal inadequacy, which could only be remedied by an acceptable offering and its death. This reminds us of the Christian’s duty to “show forth the praises (virtues, excellencies) of Him who hath called you out of darkness into His marvellous light,” 1 Peter 2:9.

But what is the offerer saying when he brings one of the prescribed offerings? In the burnt offering is declared the fact that the offerer is personally unacceptable to God, and therefore must bring an offering for his acceptance. The meal offering declares that the mans life is unsatisfying to God, and hence he must bring flour, the support of life (see Deuteronomy 24:6), as a meal to satisfy God. Man is by nature uneasy in the presence of God, Genesis 3:8, but when that uneasiness has been dealt with, he may bring a peace offering. Man is unrighteous, by nature and by practice, and therefore stands in need of a sin offering. What he is, and what he has done, both call forth the fiery anger of a sin-hating God, but Divine mercy makes provision, so that the fire consumes the sin offering and not the sinner.

Can it really be that God is fully satisfied with the presentation to Him of the bodies of beasts? Is this His final word on the matter? Do not these verses point to a more wonderful offering? Even to the one offered by Him who said as He came into the world, “Sacrifice and offering Thou wouldest not, but a body hast Thou prepared Me: in burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin Thou hast had no pleasure. Then said I, Lo I come (in the volume of the book it is written of Me,) to do Thy will, O God,” Hebrews 10:5-7. The animal sacrifices were God’s will for the time then present, but His ultimate and final will is to bless men on the established basis of the offering consisting of the body of Jesus Christ once for all, Hebrews 10:10. So when Christ came into the world He is presented to us by the writers of the four Gospels as the only one fit and qualified to go to the place of sacrifice, and to give God the utmost pleasure in so doing.

John records that purging of the temple which took place near the beginning of Christ’s public ministry, when He expelled the oxen, the sheep and the doves from the temple courts. These being, of course, the same three classes of offering that might be brought as burnt offerings. Thus is seems as though the Lord is saying at the very outset that He will “take away the first, and establish the second,” Hebrews 10:9, knowing full well that in those burnt offerings God had no pleasure.

We must note the significance of the fact that in Leviticus chapter one we have three distinct parts to the ritual, namely (i) the part played by the offerer, (ii) by the offering and (iii) by the priest. Why, we may well ask, are they all needed? In seeking to answer this question we must remember that the Divine ideal was that the whole of the nation of Israel, in covenant relationship with God, should be a kingdom of priests, Exodus 19:6. However, that covenant, like the tables of stone, was broken at the foot of Mount Sinai, and instead of bringing a bullock to God in worship, they bowed down to a golden calf in idolatry. Thus they “changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever, Amen,” Romans 1:25.

As a consequence, Aaron and his sons were appointed to act as intermediaries, being ordained of God “for everything of the altar, and within the veil,” Numbers 18:7. The Israelite, then, whilst he brings his offering, and does certain things to it near the altar, is not allowed to officiate at the altar.

Does not this plainly indicate to us that the Levitical system was imperfect? Or as the writer to the Hebrews puts it, weak and unprofitable, Hebrews 7:18. The common Israelite can neither attend to the altar, nor enter within the veil. The very fact that he needs a priest to stand between himself and God is a pointer to the shortcomings of the law-system, “for the law made nothing perfect,” Hebrews 7:19.

Summarising, we may say the following:
The offering was suitable, but did not willingly come to the altar, being an unintelligent animal. The offerer was willing to come to the altar, but was unsuitable. The offerer, although willing to come to the altar, is barred from officiating there, and his deficiency in this respect is made up by the mediating priest. Thus the deficiencies that are found in the man, are made up by the offering, and by the priest.

How different is Christ to all this! Unlike the animal offering, He is intelligent with regard to God’s requirements, and willing as well. He needs not to be driven to the place of sacrifice, but “offered Himself without spot to God”, Hebrews 9:14. Those words “without spot” tell so clearly that He is suitable as well. Nor does He need a priest to interpose between Himself and His God, for He presented Himself for sacrifice.

How different to the Old Testament procedure is the way a believer of this age is able to approach God! A better prospect is placed before him, by which he draws nigh to God, Hebrews 7:19. He does not hover anxiously at the gate of an earthly sanctuary to see if the sacrifice he brings is acceptable, and then approach just a little nearer to the presence of God to stand beside the altar, and then retrace his steps to the outside world again. Rather, he is able to enter with boldness into the very presence of God in virtue of the accepted sacrifice of Christ, and to draw near to God to offer the sacrifice of praise, the fruit of lips which confess His Name, Hebrews 10:19; 13:15. How foolish to be satisfied with the altars, priests and sanctuaries, so-called, of earth, when such a prospect is opened up to view, and the exhortation “let us draw near”, comes to us, Hebrews 10:22.

Not only were there the three elements of animal, offerer and priest in the ceremony in Leviticus 1, but there was opportunity given to bring one of five classes of sacrifice. That of oxen occupies a section on its own, then sheep and goats are grouped together, and finally, pigeons and doves.

Looking at the prescriptions in general, we may surely believe that they have something to teach us regarding Christ, for the Saviour on the Emmaus Road began at “Moses and all the prophets, and “expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself,” Luke 24:27.

Shall we be content with thinking that the bullock, being presumably a rich man’s offering, was of more value than the poor man’s offering of doves? Does not this view tend to disparage the dove offering as being of little account? How may we apply that sort of idea to the sacrifice of Christ? Who will dare to suggest that there is inferior and superior with Him who doeth all things well? We are warned against this line of thought by the Lord’s estimate of the widow’s two mites, for He said she cast in more than those who cast in much, for He saw how the rich gave, as well as what they gave Mark 12:41-44. She gave in faith, and God hath chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, James 2:5.

Rather than setting one class of offering against another, it is surely better to think that in these different offerings there are presented different aspects of the sacrifice of Christ. So that in the bullock section we find an emphasis on the doing of God the Father’s will. In the sheep section there is emphasis on the will of Christ, and in the dove section, the mind of the Spirit is worked out. So that the words of Christ “I come to do Thy will, O (Triune) God” are anticipated in this chapter. It is suggested, then, that the three persons of the Godhead and their attitude to the sacrifice at Calvary are hinted at in these verses. We shall find that in each of the three sections there are things said which are not repeated in the other two, and these distinctive features will perhaps take on new meaning when considered in the light of the foregoing suggestion.

1:3 If his offering be a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish: he shall offer it of his own voluntary will at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the LORD.

We must notice, first of all, as we begin our consideration of the details in these verses, the different expressions that are used for “offering”. When the word is used by itself, then the idea is that of an approach offering, that which is brought by one who draws near to God. The word is found in verses 2 (twice), 3, 10, and 14, (twice).

When the word offering is linked with the words “made by fire”, as in verses 9,13 and 17, then the thought is of what happened to the sacrifice after it had been brought near. And when the expression “burnt sacrifice” is used, as in verses 3, 4, 6, 9, 10, 13, 14 and 17, then there is emphasised what happened to the offering after it had been brought near and subjected to the action of the fire, for there ascended to God what is described as a sweet savour, and thus the words “burnt sacrifice” may equally well be translated “ascending offering”.

Perhaps this is a suitable juncture to notice a fundamental difference between the burning of the burnt offering, and the burning of the sin offering, for the words employed in each case are different, and are also instructive. We might summarise the difference between the two by saying that whereas in the case of the burnt offering the fire made the offering, for it is described, as we have seen, as “an offering made by fire”, in the case of the sin offering the fire may be said to unmake, or destroy the offering. In the former, the fires of Divine holiness only served to enhance and draw out the excellence latent in the offering, whereas in the case of the sin offering the fires of Divine anger against sin utterly consumed the sacrifice as it was burnt up without the camp.

In the case of the burnt offering the word means “burn as incense”, emphasising that the odour of the sacrifice as it was subjected to the action of the fire was a sweet savour to God, a smell from which He derived satisfaction, and in which He could rest. The burning of the sin offering on the other hand was a burning designed to dispose of the offending article, in this case sin, which God cannot tolerate in any way.

Praise God! there is One, even His Own Son made flesh, Who, when subjected to the Divine fire at the Calvary, not only yielded to God the incense of utmost moral worth, but who, at the same time, could satisfy the righteous demands of God against sin.

To return to the Burnt offering, however, with its progress of thought from the initial approach, then the fire causing a sweet savour, and then that savour ascending to God in heaven. In John’s Gospel there is a three-fold mention of ascending to heaven. Each time it is the Lord Jesus speaking. In John 3:13 He says, “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but He that came down from heaven, even the Son of Man which is in heaven.” In the expression “which is in heaven”, the Lord Jesus indicates that His proper dwelling place is in heaven, and even whilst found here upon the earth as the Son of Man (a title which connects Him with the earth), heaven is His home. Hence He can tell Nicodemus, from direct and present experience, of “heavenly things,” John 3:11,12. See also John 3:31,32; 5:19; 8:38. There may also be an allusion to the words of Daniel 7:13, where the Son of Man is viewed by the prophet as being in heaven, and receiving universal dominion from the Ancient of Days, as He is brought near before Him. Thus the Lord Jesus, whilst speaking to Nicodemus, is conscious of acceptance in God’s presence in heaven, and is confident that, when the time comes, the heavens will receive Him.

The second reference is found in that chapter which contains Christ’s discourse on the Bread of Life, prompted by the miraculous feeding of the 5,000, with its reminders of God’s provision of the manna when Israel were travelling through the wilderness. Just as the Israelites, when they came out of their tents on the first morning the manna came, had said “What is it”? so in John 6:42, when Christ the true Bread had come down from heaven, they said “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know”? thus betraying the fact that they did not really know who He was. In response, the Lord Jesus asks, in John 6:62, “What and if ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up where He was before?” And if they had not believed Him when He spoke of having come down from heaven, what would they do if He ascended back to where He came from? They would not believe that either, for these things are spiritually discerned, and man cannot profit from the flesh and its reasonings, John 6:63. During Israel’s wilderness days, a pot of manna was laid up in the presence of God, unseen by the majority of the people of Israel, so the Lord Jesus would be “laid up” in the presence of God, unseen by the majority of men. For only the believing few can say “We see Jesus”, Hebrews 2:9.

The third reference has to do with the then-future, when the Lord Jesus, having risen from the dead, was about to ascend to His Father and God. “Touch Me not; for I am not yet ascended to My Father,” John 20:17. “Go to my brethren”, said He to Mary, reminding us of the quotation that is found in Hebrews 2:12, “I will declare Thy name unto my brethren”. Reminding us also of His declared intention in John 17:26 of making known the Father‘s name to His own, that they might enter into the good of what that name reveals.

What do Christ’s brethren learn about the character of God ? Firstly, the Lord says, “My Father and your Father”, indicating that the loving relationship which the Lord Jesus enjoyed with His Father whilst here upon the earth, may also be known by those who can call Him Father also.

Secondly, “My God and your God,” indicating that the strength and resources which were available to Christ when here below, are guaranteed to those who follow Him in the path of faith and dependence. For did He not say, “I was cast upon Thee from the womb: Thou art my God from my mother’s belly”, Psalm 22:10? Thus from the very first moment of conscious existence as a man, the Lord Jesus is said to be absolutely dependent upon God, with no suspicion of the independence and self-sufficiency which are the hallmarks of Adam and his race.

What a privilege to pass through this world in an attitude of dependence upon God, even as Christ did. The apostle Paul knew something of this when he wrote to the believers of his day, “My God shall supply all your need according to His riches in glory by Christ Jesus”, Philippians 4:19. May the Lord grant that His people know increasingly the love of Christ’s Father and the support of Christ’s God.

But why should these things be linked to the ascension of the Lord Jesus? Is not one reason the fact that He ascends to act as advocate with the Father 1 John 2:1, maintaining us in the good of our relationship with our Father; and He ascends, also, to act as High Priest in the presence of God for us Hebrews 9:24, to maintain us as those who confess that they need Divine resources?

This three-fold mention of “ascending” is all the more remarkable when we remember that John does not give to us any historical record of the return of Christ to heaven, but in the place where we might expect to find it, we find the Lord Jesus referring to His return. It is as if His going away was a foregone conclusion. At all times the Lord was suited for the presence of God in heaven, and if He went away, it would be followed by His sure return, that those made fit for heaven by His sacrifice, might be escorted there also. For His “touch Me not”, indicates that His people of this present age are linked to Him, not in any earthly way, but rather are joined to Him as He is in heaven, as expressed in Ephesians 2:5,6- “quickened together”, “raised up together”, “seated together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus”. His coming for us guarantees that just as we are in heavenly places in Him now, so we shall be in heavenly places with Him then.

Psalm 50.9 indicates that the bullock is taken out of the house, so it is a domesticated animal, not a wild one. There was nothing permanently suitable in the houses of the men of Israel, so out of the Father’s house in heaven comes One who will satisfy Him infinitely. His words were, “I came forth from the Father” John 16:28. And He pressed ever onward and upward to the Father again, via the place of sacrifice, and by His work at that place made it possible for His own to occupy the “many abiding places” in the Father’s house on high.

Significantly enough, the symbol for the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet is an ox, and that for the last letter, a cross; thus the greatness and scope of His work are enshrined in the very letters used in the writing of the Old Testament. Just as the greatness of His person is enshrined in the letters used in the New Testament, for He is the Alpha and the Omega, beginning all, and Himself the Beginning, Colossians 1:18, and consummating all, and Himself the Consummation. Revelation 22.13.

Something of the determination of the Lord Jesus is indicated by the stipulation that the sacrifice must be a male, emphasising energy, and the active side of things. Those who breed animals have a saying that “the ram is half the flock, the bull is half the herd,” for the nature, character and productive capacity of these two animals has far reaching effects on the rest of the flock or herd. Consider then, how great a sacrifice is involved in giving up this animal. Indeed, in verse 5 the word for bullock is literally “son of the herd”, an expression indicating an animal deserving of special notice, one that all the cows in the herd would be proud to own as her son. What an act of devotion on the part of an Israelite to give up this “son”.

But this is but a faint picture of the sacrifice which God the Father made when He “spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all,” Romans 8:32. The sacrifice by Abraham of his only-begotten son Isaac, in the land of Moriah, (the word Moriah means “the vision of the Lord”), gives us vision and insight into what God was minded to do centuries later at Calvary. Well might Abraham call the place “Jehovah Jireh”, a name which can mean either “The Lord will see”, or, “The Lord will provide”. For the Lord could see in Abraham’s act of devotion a rehearsal of what He Himself would later do, when He would provide the required sacrifice. And Moses adds the inspired comment upon all this in Genesis 22:14 when he says “as it is said to this day, In the mount of the Lord it shall be seen”. He envisages that others would look back to the sacrifice and think of Moriah not as the mount of Abraham, but of the Lord. Just as believers today look back to Calvary to see the Father’s love and the Son’s willingness.

Calvary is remembered not so much for what men and Satan did, although their dread conspiracy is not forgotten, but rather as the place where God was active and where every attribute of God was brought out into its full display, John 12:28; 13:31. May it be that as believers we have an increasingly deeper insight into the meaning of Calvary, that we might be prompted to a life of sacrifice ourselves. For this is the practical lesson the apostle draws from his mention of the mercies of God in Romans 12:1,2. The penning of the parenthetical chapters 9-11 has not caused the apostle to forget the tender mercy of God when He gave up His Son so freely. Nor should we forget our personal responsibility to present our bodies a living sacrifice to God.

But to return to the text of Leviticus chapter one. The male must be “without blemish”, a phrase used of the Lord Jesus in the New Testament in 1 Peter 1:19. And this introduces us to a very important, and indeed vital feature of the person of Christ, namely His absolute sinlessness. He was blamed by men for several things, such as law-breaking, John 5:18; deceiving the people, 7:12; untruthfulness, 8:13; demon-possession, 8:48; blasphemy, 10:33, but, although He was blamed, He was in fact without blemish and the Father could say from heaven on more than one occasion that Christ was the One in whom He was well-pleased. Who will dare to reverse the verdict of heaven?

Isaiah had prophesied beforehand of the attitude of the Lord Jesus in the face of all this, His attitude would be, “He is near that justifieth Me…the Lord God will help Me,” Isaiah 50:8,9. Whilst He was cursed by men, the psalmist spoke beforehand of Christ ascending to the hill of the Lord and receiving God’s blessing, and instead of the unrighteous dealings of men with the Lord Jesus upon the earth, He would be righteously vindicated in heaven, Psalm 24:3,5.

The phrase “without blemish” signifies to be perfect (everything being present) and complete, (nothing being absent). And how fully the New Testament bears out this feature of the Lord’s person. Since He Himself is perfect and complete, all He does is perfect and complete also. Indeed, unless this were so, His sacrificial work is invalid, for Leviticus 22:21 gives the Divine Law, “it shall be perfect to be accepted”. How important then is this matter of the sinlessness of the Lord Jesus, for apart from anything else, it affects the work which He did in sacrifice. If that work is in any way defective, the results are likewise defective, and there is no possibility of a standing in the presence of God for man.

True it is that the word “perfect” is used of men in the Old Testament such as Noah, Genesis 6:9, and David, but they had been made perfect by the grace of God, as David himself said, “It is God that…maketh my way perfect”, Psalm 18:32. God’s Son, on the other hand, is essentially perfect. Certainly He is described as being made perfect in Hebrews 2:10; 5:9, but these references have not to do with His personal character. The life and sufferings of the Lord Jesus have perfected or fully-equipped Him to serve His people still.

When the apostle Peter writes to servants, exhorting them to bear suffering patiently, 1 Peter 2:18-25, he reminds them of the example of Christ, Jehovah’s suffering servant, and he does so by using words taken from one of the Songs of the Servant in Isaiah’s prophecy. Isaiah had written concerning Christ, “He had done no violence”, Isaiah 53:9; but borne along by the Spirit of God, Peter extends the scope of this statement and says “Who did no sin” whether violent or otherwise. As such, it was fitting that He should not be given a grave at the foot of the cross, where doubtless the transgressors who were crucified with Him, (who had done violence), were unceremoniously flung, but rather in a clean and new tomb, amidst the fragrance of spices lovingly prepared.

Peter then, emphasises the sinless activity of the Son of God, the one-time fisherman being a man of action himself, (even if sometimes his actions were violent, as when he wielded a sword in Gethsemane!). Paul, however, the man of intellect, dwells on the working of Christ’s mind, and writes “He knew no sin”, 2 Corinthians 5:21. The Lord Jesus had no experimental or practical knowledge of what it was to sin. He knew what sin was in others, and exposed that sin, as the Gospel records abundantly show, but He was totally separate from it. The apostle John was the man of deep insight, and He probes the mystery of the person of Christ, and concludes by the Spirit, that “in Him is no sin” 1 John 3:5 and “He is righteous” 3:7, and again “God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all”, 1:5. Note John uses the word “is”, for he is writing of the being and the essence of the person of the Son of God. He does not say, “in Him was no sin”, for then we would be led to limit our thinking to a particular time. But when he writes “is” we are taken beyond a particular period to think of His person.

John wrote in a day when there were those who suggested that Jesus Christ had not come in the flesh, but only seemed to be a real man. They also taught that matter was evil, and a holy God could not have any dealings with material things on that account. John refutes this double error, for he speaks of “handling” the Lord Jesus, and labels those who deny Jesus Christ come in the flesh as anti-Christian, 1 John 1:1; 4:3. He asserts that despite His real manhood in flesh and blood, the Lord has no taint of evil, for in Him is no sin. And since He is God, John 1:1, and in God there is no darkness at all, then there is in Christ no darkness at all either.

Thus these three inspired writers urge upon us the important truth that God’s Son had no sin at all in His record, His mind, or His being, but in all things and in all ways pleased the Father well. The prince of this world came, as Christ said he would, John 14:30, and derived no satisfaction at all from Him, for Satan delights only in evil. The Father, on the other hand, who delights only in good, found everything He sought for in His Son, for He is righteous, 1 John 3:7; pure, 1 John 3:3; and holy, Acts 2:27.

Exodus 29:42,43 describes the place of the burnt offering as marked by four things. Firstly, Divine scrutiny, for it was “before the Lord”; secondly, Divine contact, for God said “meet you”; thirdly, Divine communion, for God undertook to “speak with thee”; and fourthly, Divine glory, for God said the tabernacle would be “sanctified by My glory”. What noble ideas surround the place of the altar; ideas only fully realised at Calvary. There, Christ the supreme sacrifice was subjected to the penetrating scrutiny of a God who demands perfection. Having passed this test, He offered Himself in sacrifice to enable contact to be made between the repentant sinner and God, contact that would be followed by communion. For let none think that God can be contacted or communed with on any other basis than that of sacrifice. And there, too, God’s glory was brought out in fullest display, that His nature might be openly apparent.

Trespass offering for a sin offering

Leave a reply

When we come to Leviticus 5:1-13, we have no “the Lord spake unto Moses”, despite the fact that the offering in this portion is a trespass offering. It is a special sort of trespass offering, however, for it is called a trespass offering for a sin offering, verse 6. We have already noted that the sin offering had to do with offence to the nature of God, and the trespass offering to do with offence against the government of God. This particular section must bridge these two ideas, having elements of both.

The four categories of trespass dealt with are as follows:

Failure, when put under oath, to declare what is seen and known.
Touching an unclean animal without knowing it.
Touching the uncleanness of man without knowing it.
Swearing to do good or evil in a rash way.

In the last three categories the matter was hidden from the offender, and then came to light. At that point he must act by first of all confessing his sin, and then by bringing a trespass offering.

So the first and last sin listed had to do with oaths, and the second and third to do with uncleanness contracted. We can see that both the integrity of a man’s word, and the purity of his flesh, were of concern to God as the Supreme Governor of the nation. No civilised society can flourish if honesty and hygiene are not preserved. The one affects the moral fibre of the nation, and the other its physical well-being.

So in one sense these acts are contrary to God’s ideal for the nation, and are therefore trespasses, but they also involve contraventions of God’s moral code, (in the case of oaths), and God’s medical code, (in the case of uncleanness of beasts and men). So they are sins as well. But they are sins that, in the case of the last three, are for a time hidden from the one committing them, and this is perhaps what marks the difference. The trespass offering proper, in its manward aspect, had to do with two main matters, which both involved property, whether entrusted to a person or found by a person, so the damage was easily quantifiable, and hence the valuation of the damage could be easily made. In the cases before us here, this was not so- who could estimate the cost of spreading germs? Or failing to be honest?

Looking at the trespasses a little more closely, we come to chapter 5:1.

1. FAILURE, WHEN PUT UNDER OATH, TO DECLARE WHAT IS SEEN AND KNOWN

The first category has to do with sin on the part of one who has seen or heard a crime committed, and who, having been put on oath, (hear the voice of adjuration), refuses to testify. Such a one is guilty, bears his iniquity, and needs to bring a trespass offering to the Lord. The orderly government of the nation is undermined if witnesses refuse to testify to what they know. This is why the Lord Jesus, when put on oath by the high priest, responded immediately, and testified, Matthew 26:62-64. He had previously refused to respond to questioning for various reasons, but now that He has heard “the voice of adjuration”, (as “voice of swearing” may be rendered), the situation is different. He will magnify the law and make it honourable, Isaiah 42:21, for He came not to destroy the law and prophets but to fulfil them, Matthew 5:17.

The Lord Jesus not only bore testimony when put on oath, but He was “the faithful and true witness” throughout His ministry. He did not have to be sworn-in to tell the truth. He could say to Nicodemus, “We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen, and ye receive not our witness”, John 3:11.

This should be the attitude of all believers, too. All have an obligation laid upon them to witness for their absent Lord. The apostle wrote, “Necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me if I preach not the gospel”, 1 Corinthians 9:16.

Of course the apostles were witnesses in a special sense, for the Lord had said to His own in the upper room, “And ye shall bear witness, because ye have been with Me from the beginning”, John 15:27. In the strictest sense, only those who have actually seen and heard a matter can bear testimony regarding it. If we had been at the garden tomb 2000 years ago on an Sunday morning in April, and had seen a man standing near a sepulchre, we would have concluded it was the park keeper about his duties. And this is what Mary Magdalene thought at first. But when this person spoke her name, then everything was different. Now she could relate this person to what she had already known of Jesus of Nazareth; something about His voice told her everything. Those who had not known Him before would not have seen the significance, but she certainly did. Her personal knowledge of Him beforehand gives her testimony special significance.

So it is that Peter declares that he and his fellow apostles are witnesses to Christ, because they had been with Him all along, and were familiar with Him, so they would not mistake Him for someone else. They had been chosen beforehand to be witnesses, for the Lord had selected them from the crowds who followed Him from the time He had been baptized until He was crucified, see Acts 1:21,22.

It is the case, then, that believers cannot now bear testimony in the original sense; but they can, and should, bear testimony regarding that which the original witnesses have left on record in the scriptures. Paul exhorts Timothy not to be “ashamed of the testimony of our Lord”. 2 Timothy 1:8. That which had been passed on to him by way of testimony about the Lord, he should not be ashamed of, but rather share in the telling of it forth to others, even if that meant suffering and persecution. In that connection, it is well for us to remember that the Greek word for witness is the one from which we get the English word martyr. We should be prepared to die for what we believe, if necessary. Not forgetting that we should live for what we believe, too.

The other three classes of these special trespass offerings have two things in common. First, the fact that the trespass was temporarily hidden from the one committing it, and then came to light. The passage of time did not rectify the matter, for no matter how long ago the trespass had been committed, there must still be the bringing of a guilt offering. In our situation, it is far better to deal with an outstanding trespass, however long ago it was committed, rather than have it dealt with at the judgement seat of Christ.

Second, the fact that there must be confession, for this emphasizes in a public way that at last the sin has been recognized, and something is being done about it. The apostle John is careful to tell us that it is when we confess our sins to God that God “is faithful and just to forgive us the sins”, 1 John 1:9. This confession being in direct contrast to the denial of sins in verses 8 and 10.

2. TOUCHING AN UNCLEAN ANIMAL WITHOUT KNOWING IT

The first of these hidden sins concerns the touching of any unclean thing, whether it be unclean beasts, cattle or creeping things. This would constitute a hazard to the health of the nation, especially in desert conditions, and with a great number of people camped close together. The trespass happens unwittingly, and then there is realisation that a sin has been committed. Perhaps a disease breaks out amongst the cattle, and the man realises he may have been instrumental in the spread of the disease. Confession is made, not only to absolve the offender, but also to alert others of a possible danger to their herd or flock. No doubt God’s promise to not put the diseases of Egypt upon the people ensured that that there was God’s merciful intervention preventing the rapid spread of the disease in these circumstances. The promise to keep Israel free from disease was conditional upon their obedience, however, Exodus 15:26, so it was necessary that the commands set out here with regard to a trespass offering be carefully followed.

Just as there was great danger that disease could be spread in Israel’s camp, so there is also a great danger that the evils in the world around us may be introduced amongst the people of God, with disastrous consequences. It is our duty to be watchful and prayerful with regard to this world. Using it for legitimate and necessary purposes, as guided by Scripture, but not abusing it, which involves using it as the men of the world use it, to pander to their lusts and pleasures, 1 Corinthians 7:31.

We should remember that the apostle Paul quotes from Isaiah 52:11 in 2 Corinthians 6:17, and reminds believers of their duty to “come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.” The exhortation he bases on this quotation is, “Let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and the spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of the Lord”, 2 Corinthians 7:1.

It is important that when defilement is contracted in this way, confession is made to the Lord as a matter of urgency. Remember the words of the apostle John, that “if we confess our sin, He is faithful and just to forgive us the sin, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness”, 1 John 1:9. This being in direct contrast with those who say they have no sin, or who have not sinned, verses 8,10. When David sinned in the matter of Bathsheba he kept silence at first, Psalm 32:3. But God’s hand of discipline was heavy upon him until he was brought to say, verse 5, “I acknowledge my sin unto Thee, and mine iniquities have I not hid. I said, ‘I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord’: and Thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah”.

3. TOUCHING THE UNCLEANNESS OF MAN WITHOUT KNOWING IT

The third category concerns the uncleanness of a man. This would most likely be of a fellow Israelite, so that which is distinctive of the professed people of God is in view here.

The believers at Corinth were very liberal in their attitude to the moral evil represented by the man mentioned in 1 Corinthians 5. Instead of putting away from themselves the one who was sinning, they condoned his sin, and condemned themselves by continuing to have fellowship with him. The saints not only displease the Lord and discourage faithful brethren by such an attitude, but they in fact act against the best spiritual interests of the offender. Instead of the matter being dealt with in discipline, so that the offender, if a true believer, (for notice that the apostle is careful to use the expression “if any man that is called a brother”, verse 11), might repent and be restored, the Corinthians were refusing to act.

The Galatians acted similarly, except that the men defiling them were law teachers, set upon the overthrow of the gospel of God’s grace. These must be purged out too, commands the apostle, Galatians 5:12. We do not know the response of the Galatians to the exhortation of the apostle, but we do know that of the Corinthians. Paul can write in his second epistle, “Now I rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance: for ye were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing. For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death. For behold this selfsame thing, that ye sorrowed after a godly sort, what carefulness it wrought in you, yea what clearing of yourselves, yea, what indignation, yea, what fear, yea, what vehement desire, yea, what zeal, yea, what revenge! In all things ye have approved yourselves to be clear in this matter”, 2 Corinthians 7:9-11. Instead of allowing defilement in their midst, they had recognised it for what it was, dealt with it to God’s glory, and when the man repented, (as, happily, he did), brought him back into the fellowship of the assembly, 2 Corinthians 2:6-11.

4. SWEARING TO DO GOOD OR EVIL IN A RASH WAY

The fourth form of trespass dealt with here involved rash speaking, for this is the force of the word “pronouncing” in verse 4. A man rashly puts himself on oath to perform a certain deed, and it is not apparent to him at the time that he is being rash. He may have committed himself to do some evil thing, or even some good thing, but without due thought and consideration. Afterwards it becomes evident that he was speaking rashly, and at that point he becomes liable. The orderly government of the nation of Israel would be compromised if such things were allowed to go unpunished. It must be possible to trust what a man says he will do, or society breaks down. Similarly amongst believers now. “Let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay”, is the command of James 5:12. Rash speaking of any sort and in any circumstances is not acceptable.

Some of the Corinthians were accusing the apostle Paul of speaking lightly, promising to come to them but, in the event, not doing so, 2 Corinthians 1:15,16. He defends himself in verses 17-24 by asserting that his word was not “yea, yea”, solemnly promising to come, and then “nay, nay”, just as strongly refusing to come. To behave like this would be to deny the gospel he preached, for Jesus Christ the Son of God was not marked by indecision, “yea and then nay”, but always with definiteness, “yea”. We expect this from one who is the Son of God, for when His Father promises things in Christ, then those promises are not “yea”, making a promise, and then “nay”, going back on His word. Rather, His promises are “yea and amen”, promising and then confirming the promise. This being so, definiteness and reliability should mark the people of God, who are the recipients of God’s promises as believers in His Son. May the Lord deliver us from rashness, and enable others to rely on what we say and promise. But let our word be neither rash nor considered, when it comes to doing evil, for we are followers of Him “who did no sin, neither was guile found in His mouth”, 1 Peter 2:22. “Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers”, Ephesians 4:29.

THE IMPORTANCE OF DEALING WITH TRESPASSES

Something of the importance of having these trespasses dealt with is seen in the fact that even an offering of flour was allowed, if a person was very poor. No excuse was permitted in this matter. The offerings allowed were as follows: A female lamb or goat; two turtle doves, or two young pigeons; or a tenth part of an ephah of fine flour. If a man has no lamb, he may bring a goat; if he has no goat he may bring a pair of turtle doves; if the turtle doves have not arrived from their migration, he may bring young pigeons; if the pigeons are not yet nesting, then he may bring flour, which he would have all the time, and however poor he was. God graciously makes allowance for every circumstance, but by the same token, insists that an offering must be brought.

The allowance of flour as a sin offering, which obviously did not involve the shedding of blood, might suggest that the man had a limited appreciation of the seriousness of his sin. Over against this we may put the fact that the effort the man would need to put into grinding the flour was considerable. There is a saying that “time is money”, so on that reckoning the man has put the value of his own time into the offering. Couple this with the fact that the amount required, the tenth of an ephah, is a whole day’s ration for him, (for the daily provision of manna from God was this amount, and this ensured they were “filled with bread”, Exodus 16:12,18,36), and we begin to see that the bringing of flour was not of little consequence after all. He can survive without eating lamb or goat, but not without bread, the staff of life.

There must be no oil or frankincense added to this offering. By this the man is brought to realise that he has not been acting in a spiritual way; nor has his life been marked by dependence upon God and prayer as it should have been, (for frankincense was an ingredient of the incense, that represented prayer). “Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation” is the Saviour’s word to us, Matthew 26:41.

As for the animals and birds, they all had features of passivity about them. The female represents the passive side of things; the turtle dove is the gentle bird; the pigeons were young and defenceless. There is a conformity between the character of the sin and the offering for that sin, for the trespass was hidden for a while, and only came to light after the passage of time. It is the delay in dealing with the matter that constitutes the trespass, or else a normal sin offering would be required. Perhaps the passive offerings are in order since it is simply the delay that is being dealt with.

There are five particular trespasses listed, and five categories of offering allowed, culminating in the offering of the very poor. This suggests a line of thought. Scripture says that “God hath chosen the poor of this world rich in faith”, James 2:5. Couple that with the words of 2 Corinthians 8:9 concerning Christ becoming poor for our sakes, and we may see in the five classes of offering a progression, as follows:

The female lamb would remind us of the way the Lord Jesus, the “lamb foreordained before the foundation of the world”, 1 Peter 1:20 was prepared to passively accept the will of God that He should be the sacrifice for the trespasses of men. “The meekness and gentleness of Christ”, 2 Corinthians 10:1, as He accepts joyfully the will of His Father, is most marked in the gospel records.

In the female goat we could see the vigour and determination characteristic of that animal, manifesting itself in His pathway here, for the he-goat is comely in going, Proverbs 30:29,31, and the she-goat is surely not far behind, if at all. Fit symbol of Him who “goeth well” as He comes out from His Father’s presence, and “comely in going”, as He went back to heaven via Calvary.

The turtledove was a migratory bird, like the crane and the swallow, and all three “observe the time of their coming”, Jeremiah 8:7. So Christ came forth in the fulness of the time, and not only knew His hour of suffering lay ahead, but also knew when it had arrived- “Father, the hour is come”, John 17:1.

The pigeon, however, was native to the land of Israel, and reminds us that the land belonged to Christ, as Abraham’s seed, Genesis 12:7, and he had come as son of Abraham to “save His people from their sins”, Matthew 1:21. Not only this, the world as a whole is His in virtue of His Deity, Psalm 24:1. That world had been spoiled by the sin of Adam, resulting in creation being made subject to vanity, Romans 8:20; but Christ came to “restore that which He took not away”, Psalm 69:4. Another consequence of the fall is that children born into the world simply perpetuated his trespass. Because of this, mothers in Israel were required to bring either a lamb for a burnt offering and a turtle dove or pigeon for a sin offering, or alternatively, two turtle doves or two young pigeons, the one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering. This would indicate to us that the offering of the mother was a trespass offering, since no other offering made provision in this way. But it is the category of trespass offering that makes provision for what we could call passive sins. After all, the mother has only been carrying out her God-given duty to bear children. No blame attaches to her for the fact that the child has a sinful nature when born, and perpetuates the sin of Adam in the race.

It is interesting to notice that Mary brought the class of trespass offering that the poor were allowed to bring. No doubt if the wise men from the east had visited her in the inn at Bethlehem, she would have had resources to buy a lamb. But they came up to two years later, as is seen in fact that Herod slaughtered the babies up to two years old, “according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men”, Matthew 2:16. In other words, the visit of the wise men was after the birth of Christ, but they were able to inform him of when it happened, probably by taking account of the time the star appeared, verse 7.

Of course, in the case of the birth of Christ, no sin offering was needed for Mary, since she had not brought a sinner into the world. He was “made under the law”, however, as well as being “made of a woman”, Galatians 4:4, and as such would submit to the requirements of the law. God was manifest in flesh, but He was also justified in Spirit, 1 Timothy 3:16. So to justify or vindicate Christ’s character, and preserve it from the wrong thoughts of unbelieving men, the Spirit was on hand in the temple when Christ was presented there. Note what is said about Simeon. In Luke 2:25 it is said that the Holy Spirit was upon him, in verse 26 matters are revealed to Him by the Holy Spirit, and in verse 27 he came by the Spirit into the temple to prophesy regarding Christ and His mother. Thus was vindicated the honour of God’s Son.

So there is a sequence suggested by the animals and birds allowed for a trespass offering. From being in the Father’s presence eternally as the foreordained lamb, to knowing the time of His coming; to taking His place as a resident in the land, and to being marked out as having arrived by His presentation in the Temple, accompanied by the bringing of a trespass offering; at all these stages He is shown as fit to be the true and final trespass offering, so that those who believe in Him may know the complete forgiveness of their trespasses against God. Because they are in the good of His sacrifice, the people of God will be very careful to avoid behaviour which harms others, and ready to make amends as is appropriate.

Let us remember the solemn words of the Lord Jesus, “Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift”, Matthew 5:23,24.

LEVITICUS CHAPTER 4- THE SIN OFFERING

Leave a reply

We come now to a very solemn passage of Scripture in which the matter of sin comes to the fore. If we use the idea of the Lord speaking unto Moses as that which divides up chapters 1-7 of Leviticus, we shall see that the first mention of this is in 1:1, and the second is in the passage before us. Subsequently, we find the expression in 5:14; 6:1; 6:8; 6:19; 6:24; 7:22, and 7:28. When we consider later passages we shall discover that the division is not a simple one, for sometimes a particular aspect of an offering is signalled by the use of the phrase, highlighting its importance.
We see from this that the sin offering is presented to us in 4:1-5:13, and that section includes a form of trespass offering. Then comes the trespass offering proper in connection with the holy things of the Lord, in 5:14. Finally, in 6:1-7 there is the trespass offering for a sin against one’s neighbour. There follows the law of the offerings.

THE WORDS OF THE BIBLE, THE CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURES, AS FOUND IN THE BOOK OF LEVITICUS CHAPTER 4

4:1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

4:2 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, 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:

4:3 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.

4:4 And he shall bring the bullock unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the Lord; and shall lay his hand upon the bullock’s head, and kill the bullock before the Lord.

4:5 And the priest that is anointed shall take of the bullock’s blood, and bring it to the tabernacle of the congregation:

4:6 And the priest shall dip his finger in the blood, and sprinkle of the blood seven times before the Lord, before the veil of the sanctuary.

4:7 And the priest shall 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.

4:8 And he shall take off from it all the fat of the bullock for the sin offering; the fat that covereth the inwards, and all the fat that is upon the inwards,

4:9 And the two kidneys, and the fat that is upon them, which is by the flanks, and the caul above the liver, with the kidneys, it shall he take away,

4:10 As it was taken off from the bullock of the sacrifice of peace offerings: and the priest shall burn them upon the altar of the burnt offering.

4:11 And the skin of the bullock, and all his flesh, with his head, and with his legs, and his inwards, and his dung,

4:12 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.

4:13 And if the whole congregation of Israel sin through ignorance, and the thing be hid from the eyes of the assembly, and they have done somewhat against any of the commandments of the Lord concerning things which should not be done, and are guilty;

4:14 When the sin, which they have sinned against it, is known, then the congregation shall offer a young bullock for the sin, and bring him before the tabernacle of the congregation.

4:15 And the elders of the congregation shall lay their hands upon the head of the bullock before the Lord: and the bullock shall be killed before the Lord.

4:16 And the priest that is anointed shall bring of the bullock’s blood to the tabernacle of the congregation:

4:17 And the priest shall dip his finger in some of the blood, and sprinkle it seven times before the Lord, even before the veil.

4:18 And he shall put some of the blood upon the horns of the altar which is before the Lord, that is in the tabernacle of the congregation, and shall pour out all the blood at the bottom of the altar of the burnt offering, which is at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.

4:19 And he shall take all his fat from him, and burn it upon the altar.

4:20 And he shall do with the bullock as he did with the bullock for a sin offering, so shall he do with this: and the priest shall make an atonement for them, and it shall be forgiven them.

4:21 And he shall carry forth the bullock without the camp, and burn him as he burned the first bullock: it is a sin offering for the congregation.

4:22 When a ruler hath sinned, and done somewhat through ignorance against any of the commandments of the Lord his God concerning things which should not be done, and is guilty;

4:23 Or if his sin, wherein he hath sinned, come to his knowledge; he shall bring his offering, a kid of the goats, a male without blemish:

4:24 And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the goat, and kill it in the place where they kill the burnt offering before the LORD: it is a sin offering.

4:25 And 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.

4:26 And he shall burn all his fat upon the altar, as the fat of the sacrifice of peace offerings: and the priest shall make an atonement for him as concerning his sin, and it shall be forgiven him.

4:27 And if any one of the common people sin through ignorance, while he doeth somewhat against any of the commandments of the Lord concerning things which ought not to be done, and be guilty;

4:28 Or if his sin, which he hath sinned, come to his knowledge: then he shall bring his offering, a kid of the goats, a female without blemish, for his sin which he hath sinned.

4:29 And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the sin offering, and slay the sin offering in the place of the burnt offering.

4:30 And the priest shall take of the blood thereof with his finger, and put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt offering, and shall pour out all the blood thereof at the bottom of the altar.

4:31 And he shall take away all the fat thereof, as the fat is taken away from off the sacrifice of peace offerings; and the priest shall burn it upon the altar for a sweet savour unto the Lord; and the priest shall make an atonement for him, and it shall be forgiven him.

4:32 And if he bring a lamb for a sin offering, he shall bring it a female without blemish.

4:33 And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the sin offering, and slay it for a sin offering in the place where they kill the burnt offering.

4:34 And 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 all the blood thereof at the bottom of the altar:

4:35 And he shall take away all the fat thereof, as the fat of the lamb is taken away from the sacrifice of the peace offerings; and the priest shall burn them upon the altar, according to the offerings made by fire unto the LORD: and the priest shall make an atonement for his sin that he hath committed, and it shall be forgiven him.

Coming to Leviticus chapter 4 in more detail, we note the four categories of sinner:
In verses 1-12, the priest brings a young bullock, and the blood is sprinkled before the vail and upon the horns of the altar of incense.
In verses 13-21, the whole congregation provides a young bullock, and the blood is sprinkled before the vail and upon the horns of the altar of incense.
In verses 22-26, a ruler brings a male kid of the goats, and the blood is sprinkled upon the horns of the altar of burnt offering.
In verses 27-35, one of the common people brings either a female kid of the goats or a female lamb, and the blood is sprinkled on the horns of the altar of burnt offering.
After the sprinkling of blood, the remainder is poured out at the base of the altar in every case.

A fundamental truth we must notice at the outset is that there is the closest of connections between sin, and the death of the sinner or a suitable substitute. Ezekiel 18:20 makes it clear that “the soul that sinneth it shall die”. The emphasis is on “soul” and “it”, or in other words the soul or person that sins is the one who dies, and not another. See also Deuteronomy 24:16. God had declared that it was part of His glory that He would “by no means clear the guilty”, Exodus 34:7. By this statement He signified that it was only in a substitute that a man could be cleared from his sin; his guilt must be borne by another.

The fact that a sin offering is here demanded of an individual, shows that the Day of Atonement was a national provision so that God could continue amongst the people. Individual sins must still be dealt with, and this chapter tells how. Note that the sin offering was for sins of ignorance against the law of God, reminding us of the words of the apostle John that “sin is the transgression of the law”, or lawlessness, and as such is rebellious in character, 1 John 3:4.

(We cannot help noticing that when the apostle John says “if any man sin”, 1 John 2:1, he does not go on to say, “let him bring a sin offering”, but rather, “we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous”. In other words, there is one in heaven who pleads our cause, who was Himself the means of dealing with sin at Calvary, and this has powerful appeal with God. There is no suggestion that another sacrifice of any sort should be made. In fact, Hebrews 10:18 informs us that there remains no more offering for sin.
Not that John implies that we may sin carelessly, for he writes to believers that they sin not. The law was given so that Israelites sin not, Exodus 20:20, but whereas the law frightened men into not sinning, grace frees men to not sin, Romans 6:14,18.)

The first class of persons noticed is the priesthood, and the seriousness of this matter is shown by the mention of two things. First, he is anointed, which means he is not only specially selected and approved of by God, but also that he has been brought into great privileges. Second, that he sins according to the sin of the people. The people were “ignorant”, and “out of the way”, Hebrews 5:2, but “the priest’s lips should keep knowledge, and the people should learn the law at his mouth”, Malachi 2:7. How serious, then, for such a privileged person to sin.
We see this illustrated in John 19:11, where Christ declares that the one who delivered Him to Pilate had greater sin than Pilate. That one being Caiaphas the high priest, who should have known how to distinguish between righteousness and unrighteousness, and hence should have released Christ, not deliver Him to the governor to be executed.

All believers are priests by virtue of their new birth, and even those who are little children in the family of God are said to “know all things”, 1 John 2:20. Not in the sense that they know every fact there is to know, but that they are able to discern between that which is of God and that which is not. Even newly saved ones therefore have a great responsibility with regard to sin. They have an instinctive distaste for it, for they have been made partakers of the Divine nature, 2 Peter 1:4, and therefore should hate sin as God hates sin.

Once he has realised he has sinned, the priest must deal with the matter. Instead of being in a position to minister to both God and man by the exercise of his priestly office, he is defiled, and must have recourse to the provision God has made for him. He cannot make amends himself, even though he is a priest, but must come the way the ordinary Israelite comes, and deal with the matter before the Lord at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. How humbling this would be! No longer may he enter the tabernacle to function before God, but another has to do enter in for him as we see from verse 5.

He must bring an offering which is without blemish, or in other words, as nearly like the character of Christ as it is possible to be. The animal has no moral sense, and so cannot be said to have sinned. It is vitally important that the sacrifice be free of all trace of fault if it is to be a fit illustration of Christ. When John tells us that Christ was manifest to take away our sins, he is quick to add, “And in Him is no sin”, 1 John 3:5. When Peter tells us “He bare our sins in His own body on the tree”, 1 Peter 2:24, it is not before he has written, “who did no sin”, 1 Peter 2:22. When Paul writes that “He hath made Him to be sin for us”, 2 Corinthians 5:21, he is careful to say, “who knew no sin”. So whether it be John the man of insight telling us what He did not have, or Peter the man of intention telling us what He did not do, or Paul the man of intelligence telling us what He did not know, the lesson is clear, there is no fault in Christ, and this fits Him for the work of dealing with sin.

In full public view, and before God, the priest must lay his hand upon his offering and personally own up to what he has done. But as he does this, the sin that he has committed is transferred to the animal, and from that point on the offering is held responsible for the sin, and not the offerer.

Since this is so, and because the consequence of breaking any of God’s commandments was death, the animal is killed. But it is killed by the man who has sinned, so that the seriousness of his sin may come home to him- he realises that it should have been he that lay lifeless on the ground beside the altar. The priest’s death becomes the animal’s death by direct substitution. The apostle Paul assures us in 1 Corinthians 15:3 that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures, and Leviticus chapter 4 would be one of the scriptures he would have in mind. “Christ died” informs of an event; “Christ died for our sins” instructs with an explanation; but “Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures” invites an exposition.

Liability to death has been passed on to us through what Adam did in disobedience when he transgressed a known commandment, Romans 5:12,14. That death has been passed on to us is seen in the fact that we all have sinned- the nature we inherit from Adam has worked itself out in practice. By man came death, and that because we have inherited a sinful nature, but by man, (even the Lord Jesus), comes the resurrection of the dead. Since the consequences of Adam’s sin have been taken on by Christ, the believer is brought clear of sin and its consequences by association with Him in His death, burial and resurrection. The fact that He is risen shows that His work on the cross to deal with sins has been successful, as Romans 4:25 makes clear.

We can easily see then that Christ has brought in far more than animal sacrifices ever could, for a mere animal could not emerge in resurrection and bring those who relied on it to the far side of death, and into a state of righteousness. Believers, however, are “made the righteousness of God in Him”, 2 Corinthians 5:21.

Attention is now drawn to the blood which, because it is the soul or life of the animal, (Leviticus 17:14), is tremendously important. A bowl of blood is the sign that a death has taken place; the death, moreover, of a suitable substitute. But notice it is not the quantity of blood that is important, but the quality, for the priest who acts for his fellow-priest only needs to dip his finger in the blood. Nonetheless he must do this seven times, for the Hebrew word for seven means “to be full, or satisfied”. Thus there is a full and satisfactory answer found to the question of sin.

The sprinkling on behalf of the priest is done before the vail. So the animal is killed before the first vail of the tabernacle, and then its blood is sprinkled before the second vail, as Hebrews 9:3 calls it. Both spheres in which he normally operated have been affected by his sin, so both spheres must be affected by the blood. Sin on a Christian priest affects his ministry both Godward and manward, and must be dealt with at the earliest possible moment. Until that happens, priestly ministry is hampered and ineffective. The believer of this present age is able to enter the very Holiest of all, the immediate presence of God- how careful we should be therefore to only enter with “hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience”, Hebrews 10:22.

Note the expression “before the Lord”, denoting not only that the one sinning must have direct dealings with the God who is sinned against, but also that sin must be dealt with in a manner which bears Divine scrutiny. Only so can a priest be restored to usefulness.

A prominent part of the priestly ministry was to offer incense, so the altar of incense is to be sprinkled too. The apostle Paul was insistent that prayer to God on behalf of men must be done only by those who lift up holy hands, 1 Timothy 2:8. Hands stained with sin are in no fit state to be lifted up in the presence of God.

The blood has done its work, and is now poured out at the base of the altar. This will ensure three things at least. First, that it is not used for another sin, for each sinner must be personally identified with his own sin offering. Second, that all realise that the foundation of everything is the shed blood, so the blood is poured out at the foundation of the altar. Third, that the blood is not drunk, for that was very definitely prohibited by God, Leviticus 17:14. Life is very precious to God, and He always retains ultimate control over it. He signifies this by banning the drinking of blood.

Now instructions are given regarding the fat of the animal, which is removed from the animal in the same way as it is from the sacrifice of peace offerings, and burnt on the altar as a sweet savour. The inwards of the animal represent feelings and emotions of the heart, for the Hebrews believed that a man’s emotions were centred in the lower part of the body. We are reminded by this that the heart-feelings of Christ were deeply affected by His work in dealing with sin. Immediately before the cross He could say, “My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death”, Matthew 26:38. So deep and strong were His sorrows as He anticipated the cross that He was brought nearly to death by them. How much more agonising must the actual bearing of sin be, if just the prospect of it caused Him such distress! Yet there is another side to this. The burning of the fat as a sweet savour meant that the personal integrity of Christ was maintained, for His dealing with sin did not alter His acceptableness to the Father. Furthermore, the fat assisted the burning of the sweet savour offerings, and so this thought is reinforced still further.

This arrangement means that the fat is burnt at the same time as the carcase, so two sorts of fire are burning at once. Which is what happened at Calvary, for the fire which fed upon Christ as God’s well-beloved, and found all that was satisfying, was also the fire that burned in wrath against sin, and consumed it out of the way.
We are left in no doubt as to the meaning of the burning of the carcase of the sin offering, for the words of Hebrews 13:11,12, are as follows, “For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp. Wherefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people with His own blood, suffered without the gate”. Fire outside of the camp denotes suffering for Christ. The apostle Peter speaks of this, too, when he writes, “Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God”, 1 Peter 3:18.

This burning is done outside the camp in a clean place, where the ashes are poured out. Once again, the personal integrity of Christ is preserved, not only by the sin offering being burnt in a clean place, but also by being burnt in association with the ashes of sweet savour offerings.

We may notice briefly the other categories of offering, although much of what is said is a repetition of the regulations for the priest’s offering. The whole congregation when it sins as a company must bring the same offering as a priest, and the blood is to be sprinkled in the same way as the blood for a priest.

The horns of the altar of incense must be sprinkled with the blood of the priest’s offering, not only to restore the vessel after association with a priest that had sinned, but also to restore to him his power of intercession, for in scripture horns speak of power.

They must be sprinkled with the blood of the offering for the congregation, to ensure that their prayers and intercessions are able to freely rise to God again.
With the ruler and the individual it is the horns of the brazen altar that are sprinkled. However prominent a position a man may have in Israel, or, on the other hand, however lowly he may be, it matters not. The altar of burnt offering is the place where all in Israel are equal before God, for that is their common meeting-place. Instead of the sinner needing to flee to the altar, and lay hold of it and ask for mercy, (as later happened in Israel, 1 Kings 50,51; 2:28), the blood takes his place there, and ensures mercy and forgiveness.

The apostle Peter was forthright on the Day of Pentecost when he charged the men of Israel with having crucified and slain their Messiah, Acts 2:22. And later he again accused them of killing the Prince of Life, yet he goes on to say, “I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers, Acts 3:15,17. Then again he addressed the rulers, elders, scribes, Annas the high priest, Caiaphas, and others, and accused them of crucifying their Messiah, but he goes on to preach salvation to them, “for there is none other name given among men whereby we must be saved”, Acts 4:10,12. So priests, the whole congregation, and rulers, are all charged with the sin of crucifying Christ, and yet also have preached to them the possibility of forgiveness through what He did at Calvary. In Acts chapter 8 it is Saul of Tarsus, one of the rulers of the people, being a member of the Sanhedrim, who is addressed by Christ Himself, and asked why he was persecuting Him, Acts 9:4. He later testified that he had obtained mercy, because he had done it ignorantly in unbelief, 1 Timothy 1:13.
So whether it be priests, the nation, rulers, or individuals, all may find forgiveness through the blood of Christ shed for sin. And so it is today, in the goodness and longsuffering of God. “Through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: and by Him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses”, Acts 13:38,39.

Christian Gospel Online, (formerly Christian Gospel Information)

For those who are prepared to think seriously about Christianity

Tag Archives: sacrifice

TABERNACLE STUDIES: Introduction

NUMBERS 19 The Red Heifer

HEBREWS 11:1-16

An introduction to the Levitical offerings

The Burnt Offering: Part 3

The Burnt Offering: Part 2

The Burnt Offering: Part 1

Trespass offering for a sin offering

LEVITICUS CHAPTER 4- THE SIN OFFERING