James M. Gray · 12 of 93

Exodus · Part 5

Some see in this the symbolism of a deep fact. God has in grace come out from His throne in the Holy of Holies through the way He has prepared for Himself in the table of shewbread and the candlestick, to meet man in his sin at the brazen altar. And now man is to be brought back through the way God has Himself come, to the place of communion with Him before His throne. The priesthood is necessary for this, and ere the way is itself shown the arrangements for the priesthood are completed.

As soon we reach the altar, in other words, we feel the need of the priest (which means mediator or advocate), who is to officiate thereat. From God he comes to man, authorized to invite man to return to God with penitence, confession and faith, and to make for him the propitiatory sacrifice to that end.

The garments of the priests as well as the details of their consecration are specified in this and the next chapter, because they are symbolical of their standing and office before God, as well as types of Him of whom Aaron and the Aaronic priesthood are the shadows. (See Hebrews, particularly chapters 5 to 10.)

What family is chosen for the priesthood (1)? What provision has God made for the preparation of their clothing (3) ? What are the number and names of the garments (4)? Notice the correspondence of color and texture of material to those of the inner curtains already named (5). It will be seen later that three of these garments are peculiar to the high priest -- the first three, and that he wears the rest in common with the other priests. There is this further exception, however, that whereas he dons a mitre, they only have bonnets or turbans (40). It might be advisable to say here that while the high priest typifies Christ, the priests, his sons, typify believers on Christ, or the church.

1. The Ephod, vv. 6-12.

The ephod was a shoulder-piece covering the back and reaching under the arms, kept in place by the two shoulder-straps (7) and the belt around the waist (8), leaving the breast uncovered. The gold was beaten into thin pieces, cut into wire and interwoven with colored threads.

What two precious stones belonged to the ephod ? What was graved on them? How were they set? Where were they placed, and why (9-12)? These indicate that God was to have Israel in perpetual remembrance through the mediation and representation of the high priest. The shoulder, moreover, is symbolical of power, so that the high priest thus arrayed became a beautiful suggestion of Him whose everlasting arms are underneath His people (Deut. 33:27). This ephod was the upper-most garment and worn outside the blue robe whose description follows.

2. The Breastplate, vv. 13-30.

What name is given to the breastplate (15)? Its shape and size (16)? What precious stones should it contain (17-20)? What graving upon them (21)? What was the significance of this latter (29) ? This "breastplate of judgment" represents the high priest as the spokesman of God, at the same time that he is the affectionate intercessor for Israel -- for each tribe and each member of it.

3. Urim and Thummin, v. 30.

Urim and Thummin are thought to be the sum of the twelve precious stones attached to the breastplate. That is, the twelve stones are Urim and Thummin, which means "the lights and the perfections." Lights as to their brilliancy, and perfections as to their hardness and absence from flaws.

"They represent the light and the right that are in the high priest for the enlightenment and reconciliation of those who come unto God by him. He exercises the functions of teaching and sacrificing in their behalf, as the type of the great High Priest.

"The import of Urim and Thummin dawned on the Israelite as he saw the high priest making an offering on the altar for the sins of the people, thus rendering them imputatively perfect, and then returning oracular answers from God out of the Most Holy place to the reverent inquirer.

"But we have no ground for supposing that God conveyed verbal messages to the high priests by illuminating any letters on the stones, as some have fancied. In other words there is nothing concealed nor mystical about this transaction after the manner of the heathen temples and priesthoods, nor anything in the nature of a charm as in an amulet. God indicated the light and the perfection which He vouchsafed to His people by means of these stones, but that light and perfection did not reside in the stones in any way." -- Murphy.

4. The Robe, vv. 31-36.

How does verse 31 show that this robe belong to the ephod in some way? What shows it to have been entirely woven, and without seam (32)? "Habergeon" means "a coat of mail." How was the base to be trimmed (33, 34)? The significance of this (35)?

It would appear from the last words of this verse that the wearing of this robe on the part of the high priest while ministering, was necessary to insure him from death. It becomes therefore a type of that robe of Christ's righteousness which is the only security of eternal life for human kind (Isa. 61:10). The sound of the bells testified that "the mail of proof had been put on, and the dread of death removed" It must have been a constant source of comfort and encouragement to the high priest as he stood alone in the Holy of Holies in the presence of the awful glory of Jehovah. Every slightest movement he made brought the assurance from the bells that all was well.

5. The Crown, vv. 36-38.

More is revealed about the plate on the mitre (or turban) than the mitre itself. What is this place called in 39:30? By the names on the precious stones the high priest is shown to be the representative of the people, and by what in this case is he shown to be the representative of God? For what does this holiness thus qualify him (38)?

The ephod, the breastplate, and the golden crown combined present us symbolically with the three-fold office of our great High Priest, Jesus Christ. "In the ephod the priestly office is obvious, in the breastplate the prophetic comes into the view, and in the crown the kingly makes its appearance, although the priestly discloses and maintains itself throughout."

6. The Common Garments, vv. 39-43.

In these verses we have directions for the garments common to all the priests including the high priest.

The coat was to be woven in chequer work as intimated in the Revised Version. It seems to have been provided with sleeves and to have reached to the feet. The mitre, or turban, was of the same material, and was wrapped around the head. The girdle was wound twice around the body it is said, and tied in front with the ends hanging down to the feet. Note the difference between this girdle going around the waist and holding the coat in place, and the "curious" or cunningly-woven girdle of verse 8, which fastened the ephod. Notice also that the head-gear of the priests is not called a "mitre" but a "bonnet," evidently different somewhat in shape and appearance. The linen breeches are described in verses 42 and 43. They do not seem to have belonged to the official dress of the priests, but to have been prescribed for the sake of propriety in other respects.

Questions.

1. Why may chapters 28 and 29 be a parenthesis in the revelation of the Tabernacle?

2. What New Testament book treats of the typical character of the priesthood?

3. What typical distinction seems to exist between the common priests and the high priest?

4. What may be the significance of Urim and Thummin?

5. What did the robe and the bells signify ?

THE INIQUITY OF THE HOLY THINGS

In the last lesson attention was called to the phrase at the head of this lesson found in 28:38.

The significance of the expression, both for Israel and for Christians, and the widely-prevailing ignorance on the subject of which it treats, is the justification for a special lesson in the way of an addendum to it.

The following is from William R. Nicholson, D.D., bishop in the Reformed Episcopal Church.

These words, "the iniquity of the holy things," are only part of a sentence, their connection being that Aaron the high priest should bear the iniquity of the holy things. Of course, the bearing of this iniquity means the atoning for it.

But we are startled by the repellency of the idea. How strange to hear of the iniquity of what is holy!

The "holy things" are described in the context as the sacrifices and offerings of Israel. Whatever they presented to God in worship were holy in the sense that they were consecrated to and appointed by Him. And yet these things themselves had iniquity. When the worshiper brought his bleeding victim as an offering for his sins his very act of bringing it had in it additional sin which required to be atoned for.

And the truth with regard to Israel is the same with ourselves. We were by nature children of wrath, and now, although as believers on our Lord Jesus Christ we are regenerated by His Spirit, still in our flesh there dwelleth no good thing (Ro. 7:18; 8:7). The consequence is that we entail our sin upon whatever we attempt to do. We worship God, even in the way of His own appointment, and yet the sin in us imparts to that worship the imperfection of its sinfulness and therefore the sin of imperfection. We pray, and our act of prayer has iniquity in it. We sing God's praises, we read His Word, we come into His house, we kneel at the sacrament and at each and all there is sin, for they have the imperfection and defilement of our sinfulness. Indeed, we trust in Jesus for the pardon of our sins as the Israelite brought his bleeding victim to the altar, and yet the very act of trust is sinfully done and needs for itself the divine pardon.

God's People Are Meant.

Notice that "the iniquity of the holy things" was affirmed of Israel, the type of the true people of God, and not unregenerate men.

When they assembled at the Tabernacle they did so as the redeemed of God. The blood of the paschal lamb had been sprinkled upon their houses in Egypt. Sheltered beneath it from the curse which had devastated that land, they had gone forth from its bondage and terror, and were now brought nigh to God in His own house of communion. They were even supplied by His hand with all holy gifts which they were now permitted to offer to Him.

They represent real Christians, therefore, true believers in Jesus Christ, delivered out of the condemnation of the world, and having received through His blood the forgiveness of sin, made nigh to God in the privilege of worship and the joy of fellowship.

There is therefore iniquity in our holy things, in every act of our worship there are imperfection and defilement, because there is present in that act the old evil nature along with the new. We need therefore to be forgiven for every duty we perform, for every sorrow for sin we feel, for every hope we cherish, and for all the love we enjoy.

Bishop Beveridge said: "I cannot pray but I sin; I cannot hear or preach a sermon but I sin; I cannot give alms or receive the sacrament but I sin; no, I cannot so much as confess my sins but my very confessions are still aggravations of them; my repentance needs to be repented of; my tears want washing; and the very washing of my tears needs still to be washed over again with the blood of my Redeemer."

The Proof.

That the meaning of these words is not exaggerated may be seen in that the same truth is taught again in the 16th of Leviticus, where we meet with a description of the annual Day of Atonement.

In the present text the high priest is directed to bear the iniquity of the holy things, but in that chapter he is represented as actually bearing them. He is attired in his holy garments, his forehead glittering with "Holiness to the Lord," and actually sprinkling the blood of sacrifice to cleanse the uncleanness of the worshipers, to make atonement for the holy sanctuary itself, for the altar on which the sacrifices are offered (for these things were polluted by the very presence of sinners), for the priests who offered the sacrifices, and for all the people accustomed there to worship.

Once a year regularly and solemnly the great truth of this text was recognized and enforced. Every day in the year, to say nothing of extra sessions, the blood of atonement was offered for pardon and acceptance, but the acts of offering had iniquity in them and needed themselves to be specifically sprinkled with the atoning blood. This was done on this annual day, the greatest of all the occasions of expiation.

Moreover, the New Testament is full of this teaching of the iniquity of our holy things, it speaks to us concerning it in those words of Paul throughout the 7th of Romans, and in his words to the Philippians where he speaks of discarding his own righteousness, even that which belonged to him as a Christian (3:1-15). Indeed, it speaks to us in all that is said in the New Testament concerning the sanctification which comes to believers through faith in the blood of Christ.

A Three-Fold Application.

The application of this truth is wide-reaching.

(1) In the first place, it enhances our appreciation of our Saviour and the value of His merits for us. It helps us to see how deeply we need Him, and how great is the sovereign mercy and the boundless grace of God towards us in Him.

The high priest in the tabernacle typifies Him, and the service he rendered for Israel, even in the iniquity of their holy things, typifies the service Christ has rendered and is rendering for us in a like case. For if there is iniquity in our holy things, thank God there is also atonement for it accomplished, and full, and of instant efficacy (1 John 2:1, 2)!

(2) In the second place, it opens our eyes and broadens our vision as to the relative meanings of sin and holiness. In the light of this text, what Christian can question -- much less deny -- the application to him at all times of the words of the apostle John: "If we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us" (1 John 1:8)?

Who can talk about sinless perfection in the light of this truth? And how professions of the eradication of evil shrink into worthlessness, and themselves become sin in its shadow! So deeply indeed is the truth of this text imbedded, as a living principle, in the experience of true and enlightened Christians, that the more devoted they are the more it is felt.

It is indeed a test of our nearness to God to have a Christian conscience so cultivated as to appreciate our daily and hourly need, and at the same time our daily and hourly completeness only in Christ. This is the way to feast upon Him richly. If our faith, considered as an act, does itself require to have blood sprinkled upon it, then as we appreciate that fact shall our faith itself sink down more and more upon Christ for all that He is to us, and rest upon Him with the very rest of heaven.

(3) It furnishes a momentous warning to the unbeliever and the unregenerate man. If there is no such thing as even a Christian's self-righteousness, if there is no such thing as a Christian's purchasing to himself the divine favor even by such life-long goodness as that of Paul, how impossible must all this be to the man who has not received Christ at all! If no Christian who is himself personally accepted in Christ can put forth one act which does not need forgiveness, what can he do to commend himself to God who is unwashed in redeeming blood, and on whom even now abideth His condemnation?

With regard to any dependence on one's own righteousness it becomes us all to say. Christian or non-Christian, with the patriarch Job: "If I wash myself with snow water, and make my hands never so clean, yet shalt Thou plunge me into the ditch, and mine own clothes shall make me to be abhorred!"

"The iniquity of the holy things"!

What Jesus is, and that alone

Is faith's delightful plea;

Which never deals with sinful self

Nor righteous self in me.

Questions.

1. Where is the phrase found which is the title of this lesson?

2. Of whom is this iniquity affirmed, the world's people or God's people?

3. On what great day in Israel was this solemnly enforced?

4. What New Testament Scripture shows that there is atonement in Christ for such iniquity?

5. What erroneous doctrine does this truth contradict?

6. To whom is it a solemn warning?

THE CONSECRATION OF THE PRIESTS

Chapter 29

1. The Ceremony in Outline, vv. 1-9.

What animals were required for sacrifice, and what qualification must they have (1)? What offerings accompanied them (2)? Where was the place of ceremony (4)? What was the preliminary act?

This washing of the bodies of the priests typified the cleanness of the whole man in a moral and spiritual sense, which, while it was true of Aaron only ceremonially, was true absolutely of the Lord Jesus Christ, whom he set forth and pre-figured.

What followed the washing (5, 6)? What followed the investure of the clothing (7)?

This holy anointing oil, for which (as we shall see) God Himself gave the prescription, was the emblem of the gift and grace of the Holy Spirit communicated to the priesthood for their service. At the same time it should be borne in mind that the service accomplished by then in a symbolical sense was accomplished actually by Christ for His people, who was anointed of the Holy Spirit to that end (Luke 4:16, 21; Acts 4:27; 10:38).

For how long was the office to remain in Aaron's family (9)? This means of course to the end of the Levitical economy (Heb. 7:11-19).

"Consecrate" in v. 9 means "to fill the hands," and signifies "the placing of the sacrifices in their hands, in the offering of which they are not only sanctified but instituted into their office."

2. The Sin-Offering, vv. 10-14.

What was the nature of this offering (10)? Where presented? How were Aaron and his sons to identify themselves with it? What was to be done to it (11)? How was its blood to be used (12)? Which of its parts should be burned on the altar (l3)? Which without the camp, and why (14)?

The presentation of this offering was to remove the legal disqualifications from Aaron and his sons on account of sin. The life which is in the blood of the animal makes atonement for their life, which like the lives of all of us was forfeited through sin. This is not to say that there was any intrinsic virtue in the blood of a bull, but as we shall be told by and by it is typical of the blood of the Son of God, which is efficacious in the cleansing from all sin (1 John 1:7).

The details of these offerings come before us in Leviticus, where they are commanded for the people as they are here for the priests.

3. The Burnt-offering, vv. 15-18.

The nature of this offering (15)? Observe the same act of identification as before. What distinction do you see in the use of the blood (16)? What was to be done with the flesh of this offering as distinguished from the other (18)? And before it was burnt, what (17)? What did it then become (18)

Sin is not named in connection with this offering as in the other case. There God's judgment is executed on the victim as charged with the sin of the offence, but here God's satisfaction with the offerer is expressed as based on the previous putting away of his sin and the presentation of himself for acceptance and worship.

4. The Peace-offering, w. 19-28.

These two rams bear a close relation to one another, and are to be considered theoretically as one. What is done with the blood here (20)? Touching the person with the blood symbolizes the purging of that person from his guilt.

What further ceremony follows (21)? This symbolizes "the outward and legal and the inward and moral purification essential to the priestly office."

What is this ram called (22)? How is the idea of consecration expressed in v. 24? Here Aaron and his sons "take the first step in offering and are at the same time initiated into the priestly office."

Moses who initiates them is to "wave" these offerings, doubtless by taking hold of their hands thus filled, and moving them back and forth. The significance of this is difficult to determine. The forward movement toward the altar might indicate the dedication of the offering to the Lord, and the backward movement a transference of it again to the priest as his share, only that in this case the offerings are not afterward consumed by the priests but are burned on the altar (25). We await more light.

What parts of this ram are assigned as the portion of the priest (27)? Observe that a "wave" and a "heave" offering are both mentioned here, the motion of one being horizontal and the other vertical. It is "heaved" in token of being offered unto God, and then, accepted by Him, it is assigned to His representative on earth, the priest (28). To what class of offering does this heave offering belong?

"Peace offering" in this verse is translated in the Septuagint Version, "a sacrifice of salvation," and is an acknowledgment of salvation already received as expressed through the sin and burnt offering previously presented and accepted, and which invariably preceded it in the Levitical ceremonial. (Compare Ro. 5.) As indicative of this it was essentially a communion feast. God's portion was burned on the altar, but of the remainder the priest and the offerer (as we shall see later) each had a part.

5. The Daily Burnt-offering, vv. 38-46.

What was its nature (38)? How many times a day? What offering accompanied it (40, 41)? How would God show His reconciliation and communion with them on the ground of this offering (42)? This intercourse promised to the people would come, through the high priest. How should the tabernacle be hallowed? In what other language is the same idea expressed (45)? Of what should this be to them an assurance (46)? This manifestation of His presence was the shekinah glory, successor in a sense to the pillar of cloud.

Aaron a Type of Christ.

This is an appropriate place for a further word concerning the typical relation of the Aaronic priesthood to Jesus Christ.

That priesthood is set before us in two sections. Aaron, the high priest, the true type of Christ, and his sons, consecrated to the office in virtue of their relation to him. These latter who ministered at the altar of sacrifice and in the Holy Place, but never in the Most Holy, do not so much typify Christ as believers on Christ, who with Him constitute the royal and priestly family of which He is the head.

Aaron is a type of Christ in his person, since what he was ceremonially and symbolically the Lord Jesus is intrinsically and divinely. Although as to His humanity He descended from a long line of impure ancestors, yet He brought no stain of sin into the world with Him, nor contracted any while here (Heb. 7:26).

The high priest, however, was a type of Christ not only in his person but in his office and functions. The Epistle to the Hebrews will amply assure us of this. It will be seen indeed that it is in virtue of Christ's priestly office that the Aaronic was ever instituted. In other words, Christ's priesthood reflects backward and gives to that of Aaron all the efficacy and meaning it possessed.

Aaron was Israel's representative before God, and in his priestly character he stood for the whole nation. As God was pleased with him so was He pleased with the nation. All his official acts were reckoned as having been done by the people here represented. All of which we know to be true of Jesus Christ as the representative of them that believe on Him. He died for them, and they died in Him (2 Cor. 5:14). They are raised in Him, quickened and seated with Him in the heavenlies (Eph. 2:5, 6). As Aaron bore the tribes into the Most Holy place so Jesus Christ bears His people into God's presence (Heb. 10:19-22). The chief duty of the human priest was to reconcile men to God by offering an atonement for their sins, effected by sacrifice. What Aaron thus did for Israel in the type Jesus has done for His people actually (Heb. 8:3; 9:12; 10:10).

It is furthermore an element of the priestly office to make intercession on behalf of those whom it represents. This was done for Israel by the sprinkling of the blood on the mercy seat and the offering of incense on the golden altar, of which we shall learn in the next lesson. In the same way the New Testament combines Christ's intercession for us with His sacrificial death (Heb. 7:25; 9:24; 1 John 2:1, 2; Ro. 8:33, 34).

To allude to a feature of the consecration of Aaron and his sons, we find something particularly suggestive in their anointing. Aaron was anointed before the bloody sacrifices were offered, while his sons were not anointed until afterward. And so, long before the cross, Jesus was anointed with the Holy Spirit (John 1:33, 34), but the disciples, who are the anti-types of the sons of Aaron, did not receive that anointing until after Jesus was glorified (John 7:39, R, V.; Acts 2).

Moreover, Aaron received a greater unction than his sons, the holy oil being poured upon his head and running down upon his beard, even to the skirts of his garments (Psalm 133). Compare John 3:34, (Heb. 1:9).

These are hints of the typology of the Aaronic priesthood, of which we shall be learning more as we proceed, and from which we shall be gaining richer apprehensions of the person and work of our Lord Jesus Christ on our behalf. For thus these things have been written for our learning.

Questions.

1. Whom do the ordinary priests typify?

2. In what three ways did Aaron typify Christ?

3. What were two chief duties of the priest?

4. What New Testament epistle treats especially of Christ's priesthood?

5. Can you quote 1 John 2:1, 2?

THE WORK FULLY REVEALED AND THE WORKMEN CHOSEN

Chapters 30-31

1. The Altar of Incense, vv. 1-10.

Of what material and for what purpose was it made (1)? Its size and shape (2)? Its furnishings (3)? The means for its removal (4, 5)? Its location (6)? How often and at what time was the incense to be offered (7, 8)? What prohibition was placed on its use (9)? How does v. 10 bear on "the iniquity of the holy things"?

Although no sacrifice was offered on the altar of incense yet the worship there was acceptable only because of the sacrifice previously made at the brazen altar. These two altars were connected as one by the fact that the live coals which consumed the sacrifice on the brazen altar also burned the incense before the altar of incense.

This incense symbolized prayer, thanksgiving and obedience accepted through the intercession of the high priest. The offerer of the sacrifice, having been reconciled to God at the brazen altar and cleansed or sanctified as shadowed forth by the laver soon to be spoken of, is here at the altar of incense seen to be accepted of God and adoring Him in consequence.

See Ps. 141:2; 1 Tim. 2:8, and especially Rev. 5:8; 8:3, 4.

The fact that the altar was "before the Lord" is significant. Although the veil interposed between it and the ark, nevertheless God speaks of it as if nothing intervened, thus showing its intimate relation to the ark, the mercy seat and the divine presence. So prayer brings us into closest communion with our heavenly Father.

We have spoken of the relation of the two altars, the significance of which lies in the fact that in the brazen altar we have Christ typified in His atoning sacrifice, and in the incense of the golden altar we have Him typified in His intercession. The latter is thus seen to be bound up with and finding its efficacy in the former. Compare Ro. 8:34; Heb. 9:25. Efficaciousness in prayer, therefore, is always in conjunction with the work of Christ for us. In Rev. 8 incense was offered with the prayers of the saints. It is the incense, therefore, typifying Christ's intercession, which makes the prayers of the saints acceptable to God.

2. Support of the Worship, vv. 11-16.

The numbering here referred to took place as recorded in Numbers 1:3. What accompanied the numbering, and how did it become a testimony of their actual condition of guilt before God (12)? What penalty attached to failure in this case? Amount of ransom (13)? (The approximate value of the shekel was 60 cents.) Upon whom did the obligation rest, and upon what scale (14, 15)? For what purpose was the money used (16)?