James M. Gray · 14 of 93

Leviticus · Part 1

INTRODUCTORY

1. The Place and Plan of the Book.

How does the opening verse of this book show its close connection with the preceding book? This connection is seen among all the books of the Pentateuch, and not only shows that they are placed in proper order for an intelligent grasp of their history and meaning, but also that their spiritual use and purpose should be apprehended in the same order.

As Hubert Brooke suggests, they form the A B C of religious knowledge. Genesis represents the first lesson of man's lost estate. Exodus unfolds the second step of the divine redemption and way of salvation, while Leviticus provides the immediate consequence of those two steps in the revelation of Gods way of holiness and communion.

Mr. Brooke truly says that the practical purpose of Leviticus can never be tested in any life unless the lessons of Genesis and Exodus have been mastered. Only as we learn that we are lost souls do we desire redemption, which is the central topic of Exodus following the revelation of the former in Genesis. And so is the next step as personal as these two. When the lesson of Exodus is experienced, when God's redemption is yours, and you thus are His, then only are you prepared for the lesson of Leviticus. This book is entirely occupied with the condition of those who are redeemed and brought nigh to God, and for all others it is a closed book so far as its spiritual apprehension is concerned.

2. The Divine Authority of the Book.

How does the first verse show the divine authority of what follows? And also the human authorship?

There are twenty-seven chapters in this book, and in these chapters a similar formula to that employed in v. 1 recurs fifty-four times. How does this strengthen the claim of the Mosaic authorship of Leviticus? Indeed, while all Scripture is given by inspiration of God yet this portion of it records more of the exact words of God than any other in the Bible.

Of course it is not necessary to affirm that Moses wrote absolutely every word as we now have it, and we may admit that different sections of the book may have been combined in their present form by inspired men at a later day. But nevertheless in a true and proper sense Moses is the human author. Observe how Christ corroborates this statement in Matt. 8:4, compared with Leviticus 14:3, 10; and John 7:22, 23 compared with Leviticus 12:3.

3. The Meaning of the Book for Israel.

It is not to be supposed that Israel understood the full significance of Leviticus as we understand it. Its meaning or purpose for them was, as Kellogg says, "to furnish a code of laws for their well-being, physical, moral and spiritual, and to prepare them for the coming of the Messiah."

If Israel was to be a blessing to all the other nations, as we have seen, then Israel must for this purpose be separated from all the other nations. This separation was to be effected by a revelation to her of the holiness of God, and this revelation is made in the system of sacrifices which Leviticus reveals, as well as in the precepts of the law, and the enactment of penalties.

The way Israel was to be prepared for the Messiah was by suggesting to her the thought of redemptive mercy to be revealed, which was suggested by the conviction that the blood of bulls and goats never could remove sin (Heb. 10:4). In the interpretation of this book we are always to distinguish between its historical intention for Israel and its typical meaning for us.

4. The Meaning of the Book for Us.

This book is of great value to Christians, containing five distinct revelations of the first importance, Kellogg defines them: (a) the character of God; (b) the fundamental conditions of true religion; (c) the principles that should guide human legislators; (d) the work of Christ; (e) the prophecies in types of things to come in the kingdom of Christ.

It reveals the character of God by showing us His holiness, His intolerance of sin, and His mercy to the penitent.

It teaches us the fundamental truths of true religion by showing the need of a mediator with a propitiatory sacrifice for (Heb. 9:22).

It reveals the right principles of human legislation concerning civil government and religion, capital and labor, landholding, the social evil and cognate matters.

It reveals the work of Christ by exhibiting the way of salvation through atonement, and showing the present and future position of the believer in His name, in this book Christ is the offerer of sacrifice, He is the offering, and He the priest or mediator who presents the offering. Thus, as Jukes affirms, Leviticus reveals the work of Christ differently from any other Old Testament book.

How wonderful as we thus think of Christ in this threefold way As the offerer He is the one who became man to meet God's requirements. As the offering He is the victim in His character and work, by which atonement was made for man. As the priest He is the officially appointed intercessor who brings man to God.

Finally, this book reveals things to come in the kingdom of Christ by showing us in the Day of Atonement (c. 16) a type of the entering into the heavens of our great High Priest. In the feast of trumpets we have His coming again and the ingathering of the full harvest of redemption. In the Sabbatic and Jubilee years we have foreshadowed the millennial blessing which follows His second coming.

5. The Outline of the Book.

Leviticus might be called the book of the laws -- not law, but laws. The whole of the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible) is called "The Book of the Law." But Leviticus is distinctly the book of the laws, in that it gives laws in detail for the government of the priests in the regulation of the morals and worship of the people.

With this thought in mind, the following is a suggested outline of the book:

1. The law of the offerings, 1 to 7.

2. The law of the priests, 8 to 10.

3. The law of purity, 11 to 15.

4. The law of the Day of Atonement, 16.

5. The law of holiness, 17 to 22.

6. The law of the feasts, 23.

7. The law of the Sabbatic year and the Jubilee, 25. -- Synthetic Bible Studies.

Questions.

1. State the spiritual and evangelical relations of the first three books of the Bible.

2. To what class of persons does the spiritual teaching of Leviticus apply?

3. What distinction has this book with reference to the doctrine of inspiration?

4. What was its historical application to Israel?

5. How was God's holiness impressed on the nation?

6. How was she prepared for the coming of the Messiah?

7. What distinctive value has this book for Christians?

8. How does it reveal Christ?

9. How does it reveal things to come?

10. Can you name the seven great "laws" it contains.

THE BURNT OFFERING

Chapter 1

There are five offerings in cc. 1 to 7, and these five include all the offerings and sacrifices referred to in the history of Israel. It will simplify matters if we remember this. Sometimes offerings are presented for the priest himself, sometimes for the nation, a ruler of the nation, or a common individual; sometimes the offering is a bullock, sometimes a sheep, a goat, a turtle dove, or a pigeon; but in any case, it is always one of these five offerings. In c. 7, for example, reference is made to offerings for vows, thanksgiving offerings and voluntary offerings, but these are all simply different aspects of one of the five, namely, the trespass offering.

It should not be supposed, that these offerings in themselves satisfied God (Heb. 10:4), but their importance lay in what they symbolized, namely, the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ.

These five offerings, again, may be divided into three kinds. The first two (that is, the burnt and the meal offerings) are forms of dedication by which the surrender of the offerer to God's perfect service is expressed. The third (the peace offering) is really an offering of thanksgiving by which the offerer expresses his praise to God and communion with Him. The last two (the sin and the trespass offerings) are those of expiation, and deal with the removal of sin and pardon of its guilt. The order in which these five are revealed here is not that in which Israel presented them, but in their actual use the sin and trespass offerings came first. Then in the consciousness that sin was put away and pardon secured through those offerings the burnt and meal offerings followed, by which their desire to devote themselves to God wholly for His service was expressed. Lastly, in the peace of a cleansed conscience and a surrendered life the peace offering was presented, expressing fellowship and communion with God. See 2 Chron. 29:21-31 for an illustration of the order in which the offerings were presented. (Hubert Brooke.)

The Burnt Offering.

Which offering is first referred to (3)? It is probably called the burnt offering from a Hebrew word which means "that which ascends." It is distinguished from the other offerings, in that the whole of it was consumed upon the altar, and none of it was eaten by either the offerer or the priest. The typical significance of this, to quote Kellogg, is as follows: (a) it acknowledged God's claim for the perfect services and entire devotedness of the offerer; (b) it acknowledged that the offerer was destitute of that service and devotedness, and hence presented a substitute in his stead; (c) it acknowledged that the absence of this service and devotedness involved guilt and deserved death, hence the slaying of the substitute; (d) it acknowledged that because no such service and devotedness was found in the offerer he needed an offering to be wholly accepted in his place as a sweet savor to God.

How is the acknowledgment of (d) expressed in the first specification of the burnt offering (3)? What class of victim is referred to here? Of what sex and quality must it be? We thus see that God claims the best as to strength, energy and perfectness (compare Mal. 1:8, 13). Christ is the only and absolutely perfect One.

What other kinds of victims might be used in the burnt offerings (10, 14}? It is difficult to say why these varieties were permitted. Some think they represent consideration for the poor, who might be unable to present those more costly; others say they represent different aspects of Christ, as (for example) service in the case of the bullock, submission in the case of the lamb, mourning innocence in the case of the dove: while others that they represent different degrees of faith or apprehension of Christ on the part of believers, some being more feeble than others in their apprehension of Christ, having only a partial recognition of what He has done or what He is to them.

The Ritual of the Burnt Offering.

Seven features constitute the ritual of the burnt offering, as follows:

The presentation, v. 3.

The laying on of hands, v. 4.

The slaying of the victim, v. 5.

The sprinkling of the blood, v. 5.

The separating of the pieces, v. 6.

The washing of the pieces, v. 9.

The burning of the whole, v. 9.

Concerning the presentation, who was obliged to make it (2)? That the offerer should do this was doubtless to represent his individual confession of his need, his individual acceptance of God's way of salvation, and his individual recognition of the excellency of his offering. The Revised Version adds a thought to v. 3 namely, that the offerer is to present his offering in order that he may be accepted. In other words, it is not enough for a man to praise God, or even seek to serve Him, until he first is accepted before God, and for this acceptance of himself he requires a propitiatory offering. God is thus satisfied by the perfectness in the offering. In the sin offering the atonement is for sin and not acceptance, but here in the burnt offering the worshiper comes without sin. That, therefore, which he offers is received as a sweet savor by the Lord (Eph. 5:2), and on the ground of it the service of the offerer is received. Note, where the offering was to be presented, namely, at the door of the Tabernacle. This not only to guard against idolatry in groves, or to compel men to worship as God appointed, but to provide for publicity. See Matt. 10:32; Ro. 10:9, 10.

The laying on of hands (4) is instructive. The act implied the identification of the offerer with the offering not only, but also the transfer of his obligation of guilt to it as his substitute. What expression in this verse proves that the offering was in his stead? Compare Lev. 16:21; Numbers 8-11, R. V.; 1 Peter 1:24.

Who should kill the victim, the offerer or the priest (5)? The fact that the offerer did this signifies each individual's responsibility for his own sin.

But who sprinkled the blood? That the priest should do this shows us Jesus presenting our offering of Himself before God.

The flaying and cutting were done by the offerer (6). Some would say that this was to render the parts more convenient for burning, but others that it signifies a minute appreciation on the part of the offerer of the excellency of his offering. The application of this to the believer on Christ is clear.

The burning of the whole is important, since it signifies the ascending of the offering in consecration to God, and His acceptance of it (9:24). As He taught the Israelites that complete consecration to God is essential to right worship, so He teaches us that Christ represented us in perfect consecration and surrender (John 17:19; Ro. 5:19; Heb. 10:5-10). He died that we might not die, but it does not follow that since He was consecrated for us we need not be consecrated. This will be referred to later, but just now examine Ro. 12:1.

Questions.

1. How many offerings are included in "the Law of the Offerings"?

2. What do they symbolize?

3. Name them, and describe their meaning.

4. In what order did Israel present them?

5. What spiritual acknowledgments were involved in the burnt offering?

6. Name the seven features of its ritual.

7. State the spiritual significance of the presentation.

8. Do the same for the laying on of hands.

9. Who killed the victim, and what did it signify?

10 What was signified by the burning?

THE MEAL AND PEACE OFFERINGS

Chapters 2-3

The Meal Offering, c. 2.

We call the second offering the "meal" instead of the meat offering, following the Revised Version. The burnt and meal offerings really belong together. They are both offerings of consecration, and when the one was presented the other followed as a kind of appendage (see Lev. 23:12, 13, 18; Num. 28:7-15; Judges 13:19; Ezra 7:17; etc.)

We have seen that the burnt offering was entirely consumed upon the altar as expressive of the entire consecration of the one who offered it, and God's acceptance of it as a sweet savor to Him. In this it typifies Christ who is the only perfect life of consecration, and who has been accepted by God on behalf of all who put their faith in Him. This aspect of the sacrifice of Christ is indicated in Eph. 5:2 and John 6:38.

The meal offering, composed mainly of fine flour, is generally taken to represent a consecrated life in its use for mankind, since flour is the universal food of man. It is a fact that God habitually uses for His service among men the lives and powers of those who are truly dedicated to Him, and this seems expressed in the fact that the burnt offering always had the meal offering attached to it. Our Lord's life represents this consecration in such places as Matt. 10:28 and Acts 10:38, and is a consecration to God for the service of mankind, which He offered and God accepted on behalf of all who put their faith in Him.

Varieties in the Offering.

It will be seen that there are certain varieties of the meal offering. The first is referred to in vv. 1-3, whose substance was fine flour, oil and frankincense. What parts and portion of the offering was to be taken out by the offerer to be presented unto the Lord (2)? To whom did the remainder belong for their use (3)?

The second is referred to in vv. 4-10, and contains the same substance except the frankincense, the distinction being that the offering is baked in the oven, or in a pan, and the priest rather than the offerer removes the Lord's portion.

The third is alluded to in vv. 14-16, and consists of what substance? How was it to be prepared? What is included in this class which was omitted from the second class?

In vv. 11-13 reference is made to articles that were prohibited from the meal offering, and one was particularly prescribed. Name those prohibited, and that prescribed? Leaven and honey represent decay and corruption, the first-named being the type of evil recognized as such, and the second, evil that is unrecognized because it has earthy sweetness in it. Both kinds of evil were absent in Jesus Christ, and the perfection of the type necessitates their absence in it. As to salt, it is the symbol of incorruption (Matt. 5:13; Mark 9:50).

Taking the offering as a whole, it may be said to symbolize His fulfillment on our behalf of the second table of the law, just as the burnt offering symbolizes His fulfillment on our behalf of the first table. Of course, in fulfilling the first He fulfilled the second, but in the burnt offering the one thought predominates and in the meal offering the other thought. To quote Moorehead: "In the burnt offering Christ is, representatively, man satisfying God and giving Him what belongs to Him, while in the meal offering He is, representatively, man satisfying man and giving him what belongs to him as an offering to the Lord. The burnt offering represents His life Godward, and the meal offering His life manward."

2. The Peace Offering, c. 3.

The data for the law of the peace offering are found by comparing c. 3 with the following passages: 7:11-34; 19:5-8; 22:21-25. We put them all together, in this lesson that the student may obtain a complete view of the whole. There are certain features of this offering which differ from the others:

(1) The objects offered. The peace offering might be a female (1), the explanation for which may be that the effects of the atonement are contemplated rather than the act itself. Furthermore, no turtle dove or pigeon was permitted, the explanation for which may be that as the offering was connected with a sacrificial meal of which several partook, a small bird would be insufficient.

(2) The Lord's portion consisted chiefly of the fat (3-5), the richest portion, symbolizing that the best belongs to Him. Kellogg calls attention to the fact that the eating of the fat of all animals was not prohibited, but only those used in sacrifice, and in these only when they were being so used. The prohibition of the eating of blood, however, applied to all animals and always (17:10-12). The peace offering was to be consumed upon the burn offering (5), thus symbolizing that the peace it typified was grounded upon the fact of atonement and acceptance on the part of the offerer. The peace offering usually followed the meal offering (see the details in the dedication of Aaron, c. 8, and those of the Day of Atonement, c. 16).

(3) By turning to 7:28-34 it will be seen that certain parts of the peace offering belonged to the priests. The waving of these parts back and forth, and the heaving of them up and down, were a token of their dedication to God first, and their being received back again from Him by the priests.

By comparison of 7:15, 22:29-30 and parallel places, it will be seen that the offerer himself had for his portion all that remained. It also will be seen that he was at liberty to invite his friends to the feast, which must always be eaten at the sanctuary and which was an occasion of joy (Deut. 12:4-7, 17, 18). The only condition for partaking of the feast was that of ceremonial cleanness (7:20, 21).

The Significance of the Offering.

The meaning of "peace" in this case includes not only tranquility of mind based on a cessation of hostilities (that is, a mere negative peace), but positive joy and prosperity. Quoting Moorehead, three propositions define it: "Peace with God, Ro. 5:1; the peace of God, Phil. 4:7; and peace from God, 1 Cor. 1:3, conceived of as flowing into our hearts."

The feast, therefore, is an expression of friendship and fellowship growing out of the fact that the breach between man and God has been healed by His grace. The Israelite, who represents the Christian saint, is seen to be enjoying a feast with God, where God Himself is the host rather than the offerer. God first accepts the victim in expiation of sin and then gives it back for the worshiper to feast upon with Himself. Moreover, the feast is held in God's house, not in that of the offerer, emphasizing the fact that God is the host. Of course Christ is the offering represented here, whose blood is shed for our guilt and to bring us into reconciled relation with God, and who Himself then becomes the meat by which we who are reconciled are thereafter sustained (John 6:51-58).

Keep in mind that this is a joint repast in which all three partake. God, the priest and the offerer. It therefore represents our fellowship with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ (1 John 1:3). Remember also that cleanness is the condition (1 John 1:9). An Israelite might remain such and be unclean, but he could hold no feast and enjoy no communion with God while in that condition. The application to Christians is very plain (1 Peter 1:13-16).

Questions.

1. By what name is the first of these offerings known in the King James Version?

2. Give the distinction between the burnt and meal offering as to the scope of consecration.

3. What do honey and leaven symbolize?

4. Where was the peace offering consumed, and why?

5. What did the waving and heaving mean?

6. What is the meaning of peace in this case?

7. What is the idea of the peace offering?

8. Can you quote 1 John 1:3?

SIN AND TRESPASS OFFERINGS

Chapters 4-7

1. The Sin Offering.

The data for the sin offering will be found in 4:1-35, 5:1-13 and 6:24-30.

1. As to the name of this offering, it will be seen that "sin" is mentioned here for the first time in connection with the law of the offerings. The idea of sin is included in the others, but it was not the predominating idea as it is here. There was atonement for sin in the other offerings, but rather for sin in mans nature than the actual transgression in his life, while here the latter is brought into view. In Hebrew the same word applies for "sin" and "sin offering" as though the two were completely identified, or as though the offering were so charged with sin as to itself become sin. In this connection read Ro. 8:3,2 Cor. 5:21 and Gal. 3:14 to see how this was also true in our substitute, Jesus Christ. Another matter of interest is that while the preceding offerings were all known more or less in other nations and before the time of Moses, this offering is entirely new and original with Israel. This shows that Israel enters on a new stage of existence in the sense that as a nation she has a truer conception of sin and the need of expiation than the other nations that received no special revelation from God.

For evidence that the other offerings existed before Moses and were not confined to Israel compare Gen. 31:54; Ex. 18:12; 32:6, 1 Cor. 10:6, etc. Kellogg, remarks that this should strengthen our faith as showing man's natural sense of spiritual need and desire for fellowship with God, and also as pointing back to an original revelation from God to man on the whole subject. God thus seems to have based the Mosaic ordinances upon His earlier revelations to man, correcting them where they had been corrupted, and adding to them where it was necessary to the progress of revealed truth.

2. Passing from the name of this offering to its nature, what kind of sin is referred to in 4:2? This shows that while ignorance might palliate it could not remove the guilt of sin; sin is sinful whether it be recognized by the sinner or not, and requires atonement just the same. Compare Ps. 19:12; 1 Cor. 4:4, R. V.

3. Observe the different sections of this law. What class of persons are first referred to (3-12)? After the priests, who are mentioned (13-21)? The congregation of Israel means the nation. What is the third class specified (22-26)? The fourth class (4:27 to 5:13)? In c. 5 prescriptions were made for the common people (a) as to the nature of the offense (1-5) and (b) as to the nature of the offerings (6-13). In regard to these the higher the rank of the offerer the more costly must be his offering, expressing that guilt is proportionate to privilege (compare 1 Kings 11:9; James 3:1). Note the responsibility for sin on the part of whole communities (compare here Ps. 2; Rev. 2 and 3). It is just as important to note also that no one can be overlooked, however obscure. God demands from and provides an offering for the poorest and the neediest (5:11-13).

4. In this offering, where was the victim to be burned (12-21)? To make the burning without the camp more distinct from that of the altar, another Hebrew word is used (compare in this case Heb. 13:10-13). The burning on the altar symbolizes, the full surrender to and the acceptance by God of the offerer, while the burning without the camp symbolizes the sacrifice for the sin of the world on the part of Him who was "despised and rejected of men."

The Trespass Offering.

1. The facts associated with the trespass offering are found in 5:14 to 6:7. and 7:1-10. It is hard to distinguish between the sin and trespass offerings because they almost necessarily overlap. "Trespass" means an invasion of the rights of others (compare Josh. 7:1; 2 Chron. 28:20-22), and there are those who distinguish between the two offerings by saying that the sin offering represents sin as a principle, and the trespass offering sin as an act. Penalty is prominent in the first, and reparation or restitution in the second. Both find their fulfillment in Christ, who not only bore the penalty of but redressed every claim which God had upon the sinner.

The trespass offering had reference only to the sin of an individual and not the nation, as only an individual perhaps could make reparation. The victim in this case was the same for the poor as for the rich, a ram of the flock, indicating possibly that the obligation to repair the wrong cannot be modified to suit the condition of the offerer. Furthermore, notice that anything unjustly taken must not only be restored but a fifth must be added. In other words, no advantage must be gained by the trespass. Thus if the sin offering called for faith the trespass offering called for repentance. It is blessed to know that in our Lord Jesus Christ both God and man received back more than they lost.

2. There appear to be two distinct sections of this law of trespass offering. The first refers to trespass in the holy things of the Lord (5:14-19), and the second to trespass on the rights of man (6:1-7). By the "holy things of the Lord" are meant -- the eating unwittingly of the flesh of the firstling of one's cattle, or using one's tithe or any part of it for himself (compare Mal. 3:8, 10). The trespass on the rights of man included embezzlement, robbery, fraud, falsehood, etc. The order of proceeding in the latter instance was: (a) to confess the wrong, (b) to make restitution and add one fifth, (c) to bring the guilt offering to God.

How comforting to know that Christ is the great antitype of all these offerings so far as we are concerned, that is, we who have believed on Him as our Saviour and confessed Him as our Lord!

He is our burnt and meal offering in the sense that He is our righteousness. In Him we are fully surrendered to and accepted by God. He is our peace offering in the sense that in Him our life is in perfect fellowship with God. He is our sin offering, the One who has fully borne our sin, expiating our guilt. Finally, He is our trespass offering, rendering perfect satisfaction unto God and making reparation for all our offences against Him in the completest and to the fullest extent.

Questions.

1. What view of sin is emphasized in the sin offering?

2. What peculiarity lies in the Hebrew word in this case?