James M. Gray · 15 of 93

Leviticus · Part 2

3. What peculiarity is found in the history of the offering itself?

4. Is sin which is unrecognized sinful?

5. What is symbolized by "burning without the camp"?

6. Define the word "trespass."

7. Distinguish the sin and trespass offering.

8. For what spiritual exercise did the trespass offering especially call?

9. Describe how Christ is represented by these offerings.

10. Have you received Him as your substitute Saviour?

THE OTHER SIDE OF THE OFFERINGS

Chapters 4-7

In the lessons on the offerings we have seen what Christ is to us and what He has done for us as symbolized in them, but before we pass from the subject it might be well to touch on the response which the work of Christ should awaken in our hearts.

In Brooke's Studies in Leviticus he quotes the following collect from the liturgy of the Church of England:

"Almighty God, who hast given Thine only Son to be unto us both a sacrifice for sin and also an example of godly life, give us grace that we may always most thankfully receive that His inestimable benefit, and also daily endeavor ourselves to follow the blessed steps of His most holy life."

This expresses the two ways in which the lessons from the offerings should be applied by Christians.

We need to "always most thankfully receive His inestimable benefit." In other words, we must by faith accept Christ as our five-fold offering, on the basis of which alone we are saved and have our standing before God. Morning by morning as we awaken let it be with the consciousness that in the burnt offering and meat offering of Christ we are accepted and blessed of God, that in His peace offering we have the right to commune with Him, that through His sin and trespass offering every defect is remedied and every fault will find pardon.

But then let us remember that we should "also daily endeavor ourselves to follow the blessed steps of His most holy life." After we have accepted Him and represented Him to God as our sacrifice by faith, then we can follow His example. But we are not in a position to do this before. If He is our example, as the author we are quoting says, then we may expect to find Him so in relation to each form of offering or sacrifice in which He has been revealed to us.

He is our burnt offering, a perfect dedication to God, but are we not also bidden in Him to present our bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is our reasonable service (Ro. 12:1)? He is our meal offering, presented to God for the service of man, but we too are "every one of us to please his neighbor for his good to edification" (Ro. 15:2). He is our peace offering, making and maintaining peace between God and us, but we are to be peacemakers, not in the sense in which He alone is our peacemaker but in that human sense in which we can bring man and man together and so be called "the children of God." He is our sin and trespass offering, and in this too we may follow His example. It is impossible that we should make atonement for sin as He did, but there is a sense in which we may "bear one another's burdens and so fulfill the law of Christ" (Gal. 6:2).

In other words, our lives are to reflect what we have received and are receiving from Christ, a surrendered will, a loving walk, a life of blessing, a heart of compassion, a spirit of patience. So, "with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, we are changed into the same image from glory to glory as by the Spirit of the Lord" (2 Cor. 3:18).

STRANGE FIRE AND ITS CONSEQUENCES

Chapters 8-9

In an earlier lesson the present chapters were outlined as "The Law of the Priests," though we might better have said, "The Law of the Consecration of the Priests." And yet in either case the phrase must be used in an accommodated sense, since we are not here dealing with the law itself but with the initial execution of the law in the consecration of Aaron and his sons. The law itself was considered in the Book of Exodus, for which reason we may pass over cc. 8 and 9 of the present lesson, the contents of which were sufficiently dealt with at that time.

The Aaronic Line.

Before taking up c. 10, however, let us consider the history of the priesthood which begins here.

The priesthood was originally appointed to remain in Aaron's family through all generations, and no other could intrude into that office. Aaron was succeeded by Eleazar, his elder surviving son after the death of Nadab and Abihu, and the priesthood continued in his family through seven generations, until the time of Eli, named in the earlier chapters of First Samuel.

Because of the wickedness of Eli's sons the priesthood was removed from that branch of the family and given to the descendants of Ithamar, Aaron's other son; but in the time of Solomon it returned again to the line of Eleazar (1 Kings 2:27), in whose line it continued until the Babylonian captivity.

After the return of the Jews from captivity Joshua, the first high priest, was of the same family, but subsequent to this time the appointment became uncertain and irregular, and after Israel became a Roman province no regard was paid to this part of the original institution. As a matter of fact, the office became so desecrated in the corruption of later times, that it was often sold to the highest bidder, whether of the family of Aaron or not. This was the case a long while before the coming of Christ (Bush).

What part the Aaronic line will play on the future return of the Jews to their land and their form of worship we cannot say, but there is reason to believe that in the millennial age God may restore it for the execution of His purposes through Israel in that dispensation.

1. The Evil Conduct of Aaron's Sons, 10:1-7.

Resuming here the text of the lesson, what was it that Nadab and Abihu did (1)? What was the immediate consequence (2)? How did Moses explain this awful circumstance (3)? and what was its effect on Aaron? What prohibition of mourning was laid on him and his remaining sons (6)? and what further command, and why (7)?

"To understand the death of Aaron's sons, notice the last verse of c. 9, which speaks of the sacrifice on the brazen altar in the outer court and holy fire from the Lord consuming it. It was this fire that consumed the sacrifice, which should have been employed in the censers to burn the incense before the Lord. Nadab and Abihu neglected this, and offered strange fire, and were instantly slain."

This looks like a terrible punishment for a slight offence. But the offence was not slight. It was a flagrant disobedience of a plain command, several commands, in short. Not only did they disobey in the matter of the fire (16:12), but also in performing an office which belonged only to the high priest, for, as some think, they went into the holy of holies. And two went in where only one was permitted. Furthermore, the offence was committed at a critical moment in the history of the people, at the beginning of their covenant relationship with God. It suggests a somewhat similar occurrence in the opening era of the Church, Acts 5:1, 3. In both cases a signal manifestation of the divine displeasure was necessary for the sake of impressing the lesson upon the whole nation in the one case and the whole Church in the other.

It need not be supposed that this punishment involved the eternal loss of the souls of these men. That question need not be raised in this connection. It was a case of God's judging in the midst of His people, not a case of His actings among "them that are without." It affords a solemn warning, however, to any within the visible church who would depart in worship from the plain revelation of God, and to any without who would seek to approach Him in some other way than the prescribed one (John 14:6: Acts 4:12).

2. The Prohibition of Strong Drink, 10:8-11.

From what are the priests to be prohibited, and when (10, 11)? To quote Kellogg: "It is natural to infer from this that the offence of Aaron's sons was occasioned by strong drink such as made it possible for impulse to get the better of judgment, from which we learn that it is not enough for the Christian to abstain from what is in its own nature sinful, but also from that which may heedlessly become an occasion of sin."

3. The Renewed Warning, 10:12-20.

The substance of these verses has been considered in a previous lesson, but in view of the occurrence of this day Moses is moved to renew the charge to Aaron and his sons upon the matter.

The explanation of the closing verses seems to be like this: On this day of special privilege when they had performed their priestly duties for the first time, God's name had been profaned by the will-worship of Nadab and Abihu, and the wrath of God had broken out against them and their father's house. Could it then be the will of God that a house in which such guilt was found should yet partake of the holy things in the sanctuary? In other words, Aaron and his remaining sons had been so awakened in their consciences as to the holiness of God and their own inborn evil that they associated themselves with Nadab and Abihu as under the displeasure of God. Thus, although they had disobeyed the law in the letter (16-18) yet their offence grew out of a misunderstanding and showed how deeply they had been moved by the judgment that had fallen upon them (Kellogg). What was the result of their explanation upon the spirit of Moses (20)?

Questions.

1. Can you rehearse the history of the priesthood to the time of the captivity?

2. What do you know about it subsequent thereto?

3. What do you understand by the "strange fire"?

4. What was the real nature of the offence of Aaron's sons?

5. What may have been the extent of their punishment

6. What lessons does it teach us?

7. How do Aaron and his remaining family express a sense of their own responsibility for the offence of Nadab and Abihu?

WHAT TO EAT AND WHAT NOT TO EAT

Chapter 11

We begin at this chapter the consideration of that section of the book previously designated as "The Law of the Clean and Unclean."

Let us gather the facts by a series of questions, and then seek to learn what they mean. Read the verses and answer the questions, for that is the only way to approach a mastery of the lesson.

How is "beasts" translated in the R. V.? What creatures might Israel eat (3)? What exceptions were made (4-7)? How far did the prohibition extend (8)?

Of sea creatures what might be eaten (9)? How should others of them be regarded (12)? What were abominations among the fowls (13-20)? What might they eat of the fowls (21-22)?

And of the creeping creatures what were unclean (29-31)? How far did the uncleanness extend (32-35)? What exception in the case (36-37)? What reason is given for these prohibitions (44-45)?

Explanation and Application.

The laws are to be explained:

(1) On hygienic grounds, and as making for the physical well-being of the people. As a matter of fact, the Hebrews have always been marked by an immunity from sickness and especially infectious diseases as compared with other races.

This does not mean, however, that all nations are still subject to these laws. They were given to a people few in number, living in a small country, and under certain climatic conditions. But what is unwholesome as food in one part of the world may be the opposite in another, and hence when the Jewish religion is merged in the Christian, and become world-wide these laws are abrogated (Acts 10:9-15; Gal. 4:1-3; Col. 2:20-22). The individual Christian is now left at liberty to exercise an enlightened judgment, under the law of love to Christ.

(2) On spiritual grounds, and as engraving on the mind an idea of holiness. From this point of view they are to be looked upon as the earlier laws touching the offerings and the priests. Each particular is so ordered as to reflect purity on all the rest, converging ray upon ray to bring out the great conception of what holiness is. Without these laws the world does not know the nature of holiness. It is an abstract quality which has no place in the thought of man except as derived from the outward separations, washings and consecrations of the Mosaic ritual. Holiness is not "wholeness" nor "entireness" merely, but an idea which signifies separation, higher qualities than common, devotion to sacred purposes, and then ultimately, wholeness in the sense of the moral purity -- Joseph A. Seiss, in Holy Types.

This holiness has to do with the body, and through it with the soul. There is, therefore, no religion in neglecting the body and ignoring the requirements for its health. To do this is to sin and to come short of the law of holiness (1 Cor. 6:20, R. V.; 10:31).

(3) On dispensational grounds, and as preparing the nation for its share in the redemptive work of the earth. To execute its mission Israel must be kept distinct from other nations, "fenced in and barricaded against inroads of idolatry," which was accomplished by this system of religious dietetics. The difference between them was thus ever-present to their minds, touching at almost every point of every day life. Other peoples, like the Mohammedans have had such distinctions more or less, and it is stated that wherever they have been rigidly enforced as a part of a religious system the people in question have never changed their religion. We all know how it has been a wall of exclusion to the orthodox Jews which has withstood all the changes of these more than three millenniums.

(4) On symbolic grounds the flesh of certain animals being forbidden because typifying by their character certain sins and vices, while others, permitted as food, typified certain moral virtues. Hence the law was a "perpetual acted allegory" reminding Israel to abstain from these sins in the one case, and to practise those virtues in the other.

"The beastliness of sin" is a common expression, and God has suggested it in these laws. The sinner -- and we are all sinners by nature -- is unclean, filthy, disagreeable, noxious, brutish. Thank God, that although our uncleanness is intense, mercy holds out to us, and indicates typically in this chapter, a means of complete and eternal deliverance!

Questions.

1. Name four grounds on which the laws in this chapter may be explained.

2. Are these laws binding on us all in the same sense?

3. How have they worked out practically in the history of the Hebrews?

4. What is Scriptural holiness?

5. Quote 1 Corinthians 6:20 in the Revised Version.

SIN AT THE FOUNTAIN HEAD

Chapter 12

What period of uncleanness followed the birth of a male(2)? What transaction in his life took place on the 8th day (3)? How long was the period of the mother's purification (4)? What difference was there as to these two periods in the case of a female child (5)? What was required of the mother at the close of this period (6)? The reason for it (7)? How does v. 8, compare with Luke 2:24, point to the lowly condition of the mother of Jesus as well as to her own need of a Saviour?

Explanation and Application.

The great principles underlying this chapter will come before us more definitely in chapter 15. The theme is the same there as here, and indeed throughout the whole section, viz: sin and its only remedy. Here, however, we have sin at its source, humanly speaking. Sin is not merely something which man takes on outside of himself, but something which is a part of him. It belongs not to his nature as God made him, but to his nature as fallen and transmitted from Adam. Sin is here seen mingling with the transmission of life and tainting the vital forces as they descend from parent to child, and from generation to generation (Ps. 57:5). It is this awful truth that forms the subject of this chapter.

The mere physical uncleanness spoken of is not the real thing, but only ceremonial and typical. In other words, the regulations laid down are not for women everywhere and always, but as a figure for the time then present.

They impose a special legal disability on the woman because she was first in the transgression of Eden (1 Tim. 2:24), and show us that we all have come of sinful mothers and hence are ourselves sinful (Job 14:4). "In the birth of a child," says Kellogg, "the original curse against the woman is regarded by the law as reaching its fullest expression, for now by means of those powers given her for good and blessing she can bring into the world only the child of sin."

The Meaning of Circumcision.

We have learned that circumcision was not original with the Hebrews, being practiced by other nations in warm climates for hygienic reasons; but God adopted and constituted it in Abraham "a symbol of an analagous spiritual fact, viz: the purification of sin at its fountain-head, the cleansing of the evil nature with which we all are born." Read Col. 2:10, 11, the meaning of which is that there is no need of ritual circumcision for believers on Christ as they have the spiritual substance of it in Christ. Their circumcision is not made with hands, but is a spiritual thing, a real thing. It is "the putting off of the body of the flesh," the realization of that which the other symbolized. Not of the putting off of a part, but the nature itself. It took place when we are "buried with Him in the baptism," i. e., the baptism of the Holy Ghost, by which we were made one with Him so thoroughly that in God's sight we lay in the same grave, having died on Calvary in Him.

The Eighth Day.

The "eighth day" will be often met as we proceed, and needs to be recognized in its symbolic and prophetic significance.

The old creation was finished in six days with a following Sabbath, rendering six the number of the old creation as under imperfection and sin. But the eighth day, which is the first of a new week, appears everywhere in Scripture as symbolizing the new creation in which all things shall be restored in the redemption through the second Adam.

The thought finds its fullest expression in the resurrection of Christ as the Firstborn from the dead, the Beginning and the Lord of the new creation, who rose from the dead on the first day, the day after the seventh, the eighth day.

This gives the key to the use of the number eight in the Mosaic symbolism.

With good reason, therefore, was circumcision ordered for the eighth day, as it symbolized the putting off of the old nature and the putting on of a new and purified nature in Christ (2 Cor. 5:17, R. V., margin). -- Hubert Brooke.

Questions.

1. What is sin?

2. Quote Job 14:4.

3. What Christian fact, is symbolized by circumcision?

4. What does the 8th day symbolize in Scripture?

5. Quote 2 Corinthians 5:17 in the Revised Version.

THE TYPICAL DISEASE

Chapters 13, 14

Here we have what appears like a treatise on leprosy, but it is not introduced simply for medical purposes. There were other diseases more serious, but this is singled out and made the subject of special regulations because of its typical character. It is a parable of sin, drawn by the divine hand, "of the workings, developments and effects of inborn depravity."

The disease is diagnosed under four heads: (1) leprosy rising spontaneously (1:17); (2) rising out of a boil (18:24); (3) out of a burn (24-28); (4) on the head or beard.

To take the first class: What symptoms are named in v. 2? Who is to deal with the case? How is the diagnosis to be confirmed (3)? In cases of doubt what must be done with the suspect (4-8) What are the symptoms of an advanced case (9-1 1)? What further condition showed that it was not a genuine case of leprosy (12, 13)? What was necessary to prove its genuineness (14-17)?

What requirements were made of the leper (45, 46)? According to this, "he is to assume all the ordinary signs of mourning for the dead; he is to regard himself, and all others are to regard him, as dead. He is to be a continual mourner at his own funeral."

One might suppose the reason for this to be hygienic, and because of the contagious nature of the disease, but Kellogg finds it still deeper.

It is one of the principles of divine teaching that death is always connected with legal uncleanness. It is so connected because it is the extreme manifestation of the presence of sin in the race and of God's wrath against it. But all disease is a forerunner of death, an incipient dying, and thus a manifestation of the presence of sin working in the body through death.

Now it would be impracticable to have a law that all disease should render the sick person ceremonially unclean, but in order to keep the connection between the two, sin and disease, continually before Israel this one ailment which is a kind of living image of death was selected from all the others for the purpose. "It is the supreme type of sin, as seen by God."

Typical Features.

These are the typical features:

(1) Its extreme loathsomeness.

(2) Its insignificant and often even imperceptible beginning.

(3) Its progressiveness in the body.

(4) Sooner or later it affects the whole man.

(5) Its victim in process of time becomes insensible to his condition.

(6) It is hereditary in its nature.

(7) It is incurable by human means.

(8) It excludes from the fellowship of the holy people, and hence the fellowship of God.

1. The Cleansing of the Leper, 14:1-32.

Although leprosy was incurable by human remedies, yet it did not always continue for life. Sometimes, being sent as a special judgment from God, as in the case of Miriam, it ceased with the repentance and forgiveness of the offender. Indeed, the Jews generally looked upon it as a judgment, and its very name means "a stroke of the Lord." We know also of lepers healed by divine power in the Saviour's time and prior thereto.

In this connection it is noticeable that the regulations in this chapter were not for the cure of the leper but for his ceremonial cleansing after the cure, which agrees with Matt. 8:1-4. For this reason Seiss thinks these rites illustrate the nature of sanctification rather than justification, although the latter is also implied.

2. Leprosy in Garments and Houses, 13:47-59; 14:33-57.

It seems strange to read of disease in garments and houses? And yet Moses, by inspiration of God, was only a few thousand years ahead of the science of today which speaks so familiarly of germs, and bacilli, and other things of which the fathers never dreamed!

We now know that minute parasitic forms of vegetable life may exist and propagate themselves in other places besides the tissues of the human body. We are acquainted with mould and mildew, and know it to imply unhealthy conditions, and the leprosy in the present case may border thereon, though it be not the same thing.

The provision in these verses therefore was in the first place sanitary, and teaches how God cares not only for the souls but for the bodies of men and all their material surroundings.

But in the second place it was spiritual as in the other instances, teaching that the curse of sin and death was not only upon man but his environment; that sacrificial cleansing was as needful for the one as the other; that the atonement of Christ covered in some mysterious way not only animate but inanimate creation as well. Read Romans 8:18-23, and 1 Peter 3:10-13.

Questions.

1. Of what is leprosy a type?

2. Name its typical features.

3. What is absolutely incurable?

4. What scientific fact in this lesson goes to prove the inspiration of the book?

5. Have you read the New Testament Scriptures referred to above?

THE GREAT DAY OF ATONEMENT

Chapter 16

When was the law of this chapter revealed to Moses (1)? This has led some to think that the chapter is misplaced and that it should follow chapter 10, an idea strengthened by the fact of its cutting into the middle of these laws concerning the clean and the unclean.

What prohibition is laid upon Aaron, and with what penalty (2)? Is there a suggestion here that the disobedience of Nadab and Abihu was aggravated by their entering into the Holy of Holies when they should not have done so?

With what sacrifices was Aaron to appear (3), and in what apparel (4)? What further ceremonial precaution must he take?

What is the offering for the people on this occasion (5-7)? What peculiarity is mentioned in this case (8-10)? What is the ceremony connected with the scapegoat (20-26)?

In what month, and on what day of the month were these ceremonies to occur (29)? What kind of a day was this to be (31)?

The Significance of It All.

This Day of Atonement was the most important in the whole Mosaic system of sacrifices, for then the idea of the removal of sin received its highest expression.

To illustrate: It must be that countless sins were committed by the people collectively and individually of which they were unaware, and which were not covered by any of the daily offerings. If, then, there were not some great act of atonement covering everything to the fullest extent, the sacrificial system had fallen short. To meet this the law of the Day of Atonement was instituted.

On this day atonement was made for Aaron and his house (6); the holy place and the tabernacle (15-17); the altar and the outer court (18, 19); and the whole congregation of Israel (20-22, 33); and this "for all their iniquities, and all their transgressions, even all their sins" (21); i. e., unknown to every one except God (com-pare Hebrews 9:7-9).

Notice further among other things, (1) that only the high priest could officiate on this day (17); and (2) that he could do so only after certain specific preparations, among them the bathing of himself, the laying aside of the "garments for glory and beauty" and the donning of a vesture of unadorned white; (3) that he entered the Holy of Holies sprinkling the blood even on the mercy seat in that secret place where no other Israelite might tread. All these things impress us that the sin offering on this day, more than any other, symbolizes in the most perfect way the one offering of Christ who now appears in the presence of God for us.

The Scapegoat.

The significance of the scapegoat is difficult to determine. The Revised Version translates the word by the name "Azazel," whose meaning is not clear. Either it is a name of an evil spirit conceived of as dwelling in the wilderness, or else an abstract noun meaning "removal" or "dismissal," as indicated in the margin of the Revised Version.

If we take it in the latter sense, then the scapegoat may be regarded as bearing away all the iniquities of Israel, which are symbolically laid upon him, into a solitary place where they are forever away from the presence of God and the camp of his people. Thus, to quote Kellogg, as the killing and sprinkling of the first goat set forth the means of reconciliation with God, so the sending away of the second sets forth the effect of that sacrifice in the complete removal of those sins as already indicated (compare Ps. 103:12; Micah 7:19).

If, however, the word is taken as the name of a person, then the understanding would seem like this: Satan has a certain power over man because of man's sin (Heb. 2:14, 15; 1 Jo. 5:19, R. V.; Rev. 12:10). To this evil one, the adversary of God's people in all ages, the live goat was symbolically sent bearing on him the sins of Israel. These sins are considered as having been forgiven by God, by which it is symbolically announced to Satan that the foundation of his power over Israel is gone. His accusations are now no longer in place, for the whole question of Israel's sin has been met and settled in the atoning blood.

Questions.

1. What makes the Day of Atonement the most important in the Mosaic system?

2. Can you quote verse 21?

3. How does the Revised Version translate "scapegoat"?

4. If the word be an abstract noun, how would you understand its meaning?

5. If the name of a person, how?

ABOMINATIONS UNTO THE LORD

Chapters 17-19

The underlying thought of this section is in the words of 18:1-5. Israel is redeemed and separated unto God, therefore she is to live consistently with that fact in all her ways. She is not to do after the heathen peoples round about her.