James M. Gray · 16 of 93
Leviticus · Part 3
1. The Question of Eating, c. 17.
It looks as though the opening injunction of this chapter touched once more upon the ceremonial and recurred to a matter considered under the offerings. But in that case the design was to prevent idolatry in connection with worship, and here to prevent it in connection with the preparation of food. It is to be remembered also, that these regulations were for the tent life in the wilderness, and were afterward repealed in Deut. 12:15-24, entering upon the settled habitation of Canaan.
The reasons for the prohibition of blood are clearly stated. It was the life of the flesh, and the symbol of that life which was substituted for the guilty in making .
As to the first, modern science is illustrating its wisdom in teaching that the germs of infectious disease circulate in the blood. As to the second, the relation of the blood to the forgiveness of sins was thus always kept prominently before the mind of the people. There is a great lesson in this thought for us as well as them.
2. The Question of Chastity, c. 18.
All sexual relationship is prohibited as between a man and his mother; step-mother; sister; grand-daughter; step-sister; aunt; daughter-in-law; sister-in-law; a woman and her daughter or her grand-daughter; a wife's sister (while the wife is living); a woman at the time specified in v. 19; a neighbor's wife; another man; a beast. The Canaanites did these things, which explains their expulsion from their land: and these things were also common with the Egyptians among whom the Israelites had lived.
A few comments follow: For example, the law forbidding such relationship with a brother's wife (16), is qualified in Deut. 25:5-10, so far as to permit marriage with the widow of a deceased brother when the latter died without children, in order to perpetuate his family.
The reference to "Molech" in v. 21, grows out of the connection between some of the licentious practices just mentioned and the worship of the god (compare 2 Kings 17:31; Jer. 7:31; 19:5). In that worship children were slain like beasts and offered in sacrifice to their god.
3. Contents of Chapter 19.
It is difficult to generalize in chapter 19, which seems to contain repetitions of laws already dealt with in other connections.
Among these reference is again made to the ; the making of molten images; the eating of peace offerings; gleaning of the harvest for the poor; theft, perjury, oppression; the treatment of the blind and deaf; fairness in judgment; talebearing; revenge; hybridity; connection with bond-women; uncircumcised fruit; enchantment; physical marks of idolatry; honoring the aged, etc.
The first three have to do with reverence for God. The next series, having regard to the poor, was not only a protest against natural selfishness, but an intimation that the land did not belong to the human occupant but to God, and that its husbandman was merely His steward.
In several verses following, God still speaks on behalf of the weak and defenseless, but long balances the subject by showing that the rich are no more to be wronged than the poor.
Reaching the middle of the chapter, the commands concerning hybridity among cattle and in the vegetable kingdom are sufficiently clear, but that about the mingling of stuffs in our garments is not. Perhaps this whole section of laws is to cultivate reverence for the order established in nature by God, nature itself being a manifestation of God. In this case the precept about garments would be a symbolic reminder of the duty to a large class who aid not so frequently come in contact with the other reminders referred to.
In verses 20-22 we come upon what seems a divine approval of concubinage and slavery, but we are to remember the explanation of it in Matt. 19:8.
The "uncircumcised" fruit (23-25) is as interesting a feature as any in the chapter. The explanation is in the law that the first-fruit always belongs to God. But it must be a perfect offering as well as the first-fruit, and this is not usually true of the fruit of a young tree. During the first three years of its life it is regarded as analogous to the life of a child uncircumcised or unconsecrated to the Lord. It is not until the fourth that its fruit becomes sufficiently perfected to offer unto God, and not until after that is it to be partaken of by the Israelite himself.
The reference to the trimming of the hair and beard is explained by the fact that among peoples to do so visibly marks one as of a certain religion or the worshiper of a certain god. Today certain orders in the Roman Catholic Church are indicated in this manner. But the Israelite was not only to worship God alone, but to avoid even the appearance of worshiping another.
Questions.
1. To what do the contents of these chapters relate?
2. Why was "blood" prohibited in eating?
3. In what way does God claim ownership of the land of Israel?
4. How does He defend the rich as well as the poor?
5. Can you quote Matthew 19:8?
6. What is the meaning of "uncircumcised" fruit?
7. To what does the trimming of the hair and beard refer?
NEW TESTAMENT APPLICATION
Before pursuing these lessons further we would pause, to point out their application to the Christian, and how he should make use of them for his spiritual advancement and God's glory in this sinful world.
Brooke will once more be our guide:
In chapters 1 to 10 there is revealed what God is, and does, and gives to His people, but in chapters 11 to 22 we have what His people should be and do for Him. The first half of these latter chapters, 11 to 16, show that the life of God's people is to be clean, while the second half, chapter 17 to practically the close of the book, shows how it is to be holy. There is a difference between the two ideas represented by "clean" and "holy" (2 Cor. 7:1).
(1) The word "clean," together with "unclean," "purify" and their derivatives, comes from two Hebrew roots, occurring in the 6th chapter over 164 times, thus showing the emphasis God puts upon the thought they express, and impressing us with the fact that a line of separation must be drawn between those who are God's people through by the blood, and those who are not.
(2) But we are taught that only God Himself can indicate what this line of separation is. Only He can say what is fit and what unfit for His people to think, and be, and do. This is New Testament as well as Old Testament teaching (Phil. 1:9-11), and means much more than the broad distinction between right and wrong. The people of the world know what these distinctions are, and for reasons endeavor more or less to maintain them; but the people of God know the mind of God, and are expected to follow it in details of which the world is ignorant.
(3) We learn how communion with God may be hindered or promoted by things otherwise exceedingly small, like eating and drinking (1 Cor. 10:31), the way we dress, or keep our dwellings, the physical condition of our bodies, and the like. Indeed there are many questions of casuistry, which the full-grown Christian recognizes as essential in order to walk with God, of which other people know nothing. Compare (Deut. 14:21; 1 Cor. 2:14; 10:23; Eph. 5:17; 2 Tim. 2:4).
The Christian cannot say: "I may do this for others do it." The "others" may not be and separated unto God, and hence he must leave the doubtful things to them "who claim not royal birth," and "come out from among them and be separate" (2 Cor. 6:17, 18).
(4) Our author distinguishes between the first half of this section of the book, chapters 11 to 16, and the latter half, 17 to 22, by speaking of the latter as presenting on the positive what the former presents on the negative side. In illustrating the thought from the New Testament point of view he uses 2 Cor. 7:1.
"Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting in the fear of God."
The two phrases "cleanse" and "perfecting " are in different tenses in the Greek. The former is in the aorist, and marks a definite action, something done once for all; but the latter is in the present tense, and implies a continuous line of conduct, when we are bidden to "cleanse ourselves" it means that everything marked by God as unclean is to be at once and forever put away; but when we are bidden to be perfect in a life-long course of action and conduct is in mind.
Brooke helps us to understand this by his definition of "," which in its primary sense does not mean super-eminent piety but "the relationship existing between God and a thing." It is in this sense we read of a holy day, a holy place, or a holy animal.
(5) But as soon as this title is given to anyone or anything, the power of it is supposed to begin to work, that is, it immediately demands altered usage or conduct harmonizing with the new relationship to God into which it is brought. As applied to human beings, it is an instant summons to a new line of conduct, and thus passes into the meaning of practical piety. He uses this illustration: If one were rebuking a peer for unworthy conduct he might say: "You are a nobleman; you ought to be a noble man." In this sense Paul uses it in 1 Cor. 5:7: "Purge out the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, even as ye are unleavened."
(6) These chapters therefore (17 to 22), bring into startling prominence the breadth and depth of the idea of as God conceives of it. It concerns the table of God's people, the home, and all their social and business relationships.
It is only as we realize this idea of , and how far we are separated from it by our old nature, that we can appreciate the typical significance of the Day of and the place its revelation occupies in this book (chapter 16). The other chapters preceding and following that revelation raises the question. Who can be clean before God? We perceive that, notwithstanding what provisions we make or precautions we take, we can never be sure that no spot of uncleanness remains, or that the conditions for communion with God are fulfilled. Only God can be sure of this, or make us sure, but that is what chapter 16 in its typical aspect is intended to provide.
Once a year, and on that day, "all the of Israel, and all their , in all their sins" were completely removed, and made for every uncleanness. The prototype of this we find in the person and work of our blessed Lord, whose is sufficient for us. and whose blood cleanseth us from all sin.
Questions.
1. Why is the standard of for God's people different from that of the world?
2. Name some of the little things which may affect the 's communion with God.
3. Quote 2 Corinthians 7:1.
4. How would you define ""?
5. Quote 1 Corinthians 5:7.
PENALTIES FOR PEOPLE AND PRIESTS
Chapters 20-22
The 20th chapter is of deep interest as showing what infinite wisdom, and love has considered a just punishment for certain crimes. These crimes are still committed in civilized communities but a different view of their treatment seems to exist. Are human governments in modern times wiser, and better than this theocracy, where Jehovah ruled? Are the weaknesses of our democracies explained by their indifferences to the code here exhibited?
Why does not this code obtain in Christian nations, since God has revealed it and such nations are supposed to serve God?
The answer is, that no nation on earth is a God-governed nation, as Israel was, and shall again be in the millennial age. The laws of so-called Christian nations are man-made, not God-made. They may bear a likeness or relationship to these laws of God, but only as they grow out of a necessity of human experience. No nation has ever set itself the task of finding out God's mind with reference to this or that penalty, and squaring its legislation accordingly. Hence the lawlessness we see on every hand, and the injustice; hence the teaching of the prophets that the present order of things shall end in a grand catastrophe, and God shall set up His own kingdom on the earth over which His Son shall reign.
Outline of the Chapter.
The first section (1-6), relates to the giving of seed to Molech, and consulting with familiar spirits, or what we call Spiritualism. With Spiritualism might be included other occultisms, such as fortune-telling, clairvoyance, palmistry and the like.
A second section (7, 8), consists of a command to of life and obedience to God.
A third (9-16), enumerates other cases for which death was ordered, some of them very unnatural crimes.
A fourth (17-21), names offenses for which a lesser penalty is prescribed.
A fifth (22-26), consists of a concluding exhortation against disobedience enforced by the impending punishment of the Canaanites, and the goodness of God to them (Israel).
For what crimes is death ordained as a penalty (2-5, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 27)? What manner of death is ordained (2)? In the case of certain crimes is any difference made between the sexes (10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16)? In what instance were the bodies of the criminals to be burnt after death (14)?
In the case of the lesser penalties, which offense demanded the most public excommunication (17)?
The Principles Involved.
Certain "reformers" claim that the primary, if not the sole, object of the punishment of crime is the reformation of the individual. How does such a theory square with this divine precedent? Had reformation been the chief thought in God's mind, would He have ordained the death penalty with such unqualified severity?
How does verse 3 show that the intention of the punishment is to satisfy the outraged of God? How does verse 12 show that it is to preserve the natural order of the human family? how does verse 14 show that it is for the moral benefit of the race?
The multiplication of murders and crimes against the family in these days may be explained by the laxity of the laws, or the indisposition of the people to enforce them. "Where God pronounces the death penalty, man apologizes for the crime, then lightens the penalty, then abolishes it, and at last legalizes the offense. This modern drift bodes no good, and in the end can only bring disaster to the family and the state."
1. o£ the Priests, c. 21, 22.
We pass over chapters 21 and 22 with a remark or two, as they treat of the same subject as the preceding chapter except as it applies to the priests. While all Israel, as Kellogg says, was called to be a priestly nation and holy to Jehovah in life and service, "this sanctity was represented in degrees successively higher in each of its three divisions, the people, the priest, and the high priests," like the three-fold division of the tabernacle, the outer court, the holy place, and the Holy of Holies.
The principle still holds good, in that special privileges place him who enjoys them under special obligations to of life. Christians, in other words, should not merely be equally correct in life with the best men of the world, but more -- they should be holy. And within the Church, those who occupy official positions or who are otherwise elevated above their fellows, are under the more stringent obligations of life and work.
Questions.
1. What kind of government was that of Israel?
2. How would you account for much of the disorder and lawlessness in so-called Christian nations?
3. What will bring this to an end?
4. Have you tried to answer the questions asked under the head of "Principles Involved"?
5. What peculiar obligation of conduct lies upon Christians, and why?
FEASTS OF THE LORD
Chapter 23
There is nothing more affecting in all this legislation than the provision God makes for the physical happiness and the temporal welfare of His people. He wants them to rejoice if only they rejoice in Him. (Phil. 4:4). This chapter sets this forth.
Compare the Revised Version and observe that the word in verse 2 is "set feasts," or, "appointed seasons."
Why are they called "set feasts of the Lord"? is it not because He appointed them, and because He would be glorified in them? What other title do they receive (2)? When "holy convocations" are mentioned we think of public gatherings at the tabernacle, or later on, at the temple; but these were commanded only for the three occasions, the passover in the spring, and the feast of weeks (Pentecost), and in the autumn (Exodus 34:22). Probably, therefore, the other convocations were local gatherings crystallized afterwards in the weekly synagogue.
1. The Weekly , v. 3.
What is the first feast mentioned (3)? Although the weekly is included among these appointed seasons, yet it is distinguished from them by the fresh heading of verse 4, and by verses 37 and 38. It is indeed an appointed season, but dating from the creation of man, and not here first prescribed. It is in this sense a kind of germ of all the other appointed seasons.
How is the sanctity of the weekly expressed in the Revised Version? What was prohibited on this day? Did this prohibition extend only to outside work, or what we would call in our day business affairs?
Do you remember what was taught previously about the two reasons for the weekly ? A memorial of God's rest in creation it was, and yet also a memorial of (Exodus 31:13; Deut. 5:15). While the specifically in mind is the Jews' deliverance from Egypt, yet it is a type of our spiritual deliverance from sin through Christ.
The original rest of God, in which man participated, was marked by sin, so that the whole creation became "subjected to " (Romans 8:20). God could not rest in this state of things, and began a work of new creation. The object of this is the restoration of that rest which thus was interrupted; hence, the weekly looked forward as well as backward.
2. The Passover and Unleavened Bread, vv. 4-8.
The feasts of the passover and unleavened bread we met in Exodus, but here we learn how the latter shall begin and end with a holy convocation, and be characterized by the omission of "servile work." This last seems to refer to labor in the field and otherwise, outside of the home.
The spiritual meaning of these two feasts we have considered. Through the slaying of the lamb and sprinkling of its blood Israel secured deliverance from Egypt, and by eating its flesh strength for the journey before them, the unleavened bread, however, had more than an historic reference. Leaven is the type of evil or moral corruption, and its removal signifies that the nation must be a holy and separate people.
3. The Sheaf of the Firstfruits. vv. 9-14.
In connection with the two feasts just named, what further ceremony is established (10, 11)? With this what offering should be presented (12, 13)? What prohibitions are entailed (14)?
We have here a preliminary feast of the harvest. The waiving of the sheaf of the first-fruits indicates that the whole harvest to follow belonged and was to God. Until this action was taken they were not at liberty to use the harvest.
In this we have another symbol. Israel is God's firstborn among the nations (Exodus 4:22), of the earth. She is the earnest of the of all these nations -- the beginning of the world's harvest, which shall be realized in the millennial age.
And the idea is not exhausted yet, as we judge by 1 Cor. 5:7, 8. Christ our passover was sacrificed for us, and the sheaf of the firstfruits in His resurrection was presented unto God as a type of the resurrection of all His people (1 Cor. 15:20).
4. Pentecost, or the Feast of Weeks, vv. 15-21.
How long after the presentation of the sheaf of the firstfruits came the next feast (15, 16)? What should be offered on this day (17-20)? With what should these loaves be baked (17)? What was the design of this offering (17)? Because this feast came on the fiftieth day after the presentation of the sheaf of the firstfruits, it is called the Feast of Pentecost, from the Greek numeral meaning fifty; and the Feast of Weeks, because it followed seven weeks after that of the sheaf.
The former festival marked the beginning of the harvest with the first sheaf of barley, and this, the completion of the grain harvest, with the reaping of the wheat. In the former the sheaf was presented as it came from the field, but in this the offering was of the grain as prepared for food. Why it might be baked with leaven we do not know.
Speaking of the typical aspect of this feast, and comparing it with the Passover, there God was seen to be the Redeemer of Israel, here He is seen to be her preserver.
Comparing it with the sheaf of the firstfruits, there we see a type of Christ's resurrection as "the firstfruits of them that sleep," but here a type of the descent of the on the day of Pentecost when "the church of the firstborn" was formed as the beginning of the great ingathering of the whole number of the . (Acts 2:1-4; Col. 1:18; James 1:18).
As compared with the weekly , this feast, in celebrating the rest after the labors of the harvest, became a type of the great rest to follow the harvest at the end of this age (Matt. 13:39).
5. The Feast of Trumpets, vv. 23-28.
We have seen that the Feast of the on the seventh day of each week was a germ of the whole series of septenary feasts. The Feast of Pentecost on the seventh week, and now the Feast of Trumpets at the beginning of the seventh month carry forward the idea. Spring, summer and autumn each has its feast. This seventh month, corresponding to that period of our year from the middle of September to the middle of October was the great month of the Jewish year in that three great events occurred in it -- the Feast of Trumpets, the great Day of , and the Feast of Tabernacles.
The blowing of trumpets was an announcement from God to His people that the great glad month had come, the month of and of the greatest festivity of the year resulting from that , and the earthly blessing accompanying it.
On other occasions trumpets were blown only by the priests and at the central sanctuary, but in this case they were blown by everyone who would throughout the whole land.
How we could be to the noises preceding New Year's Day, or the 4th of July, or Thanksgiving Day, if only the blowing of the horns were an act of worship in recognition of the goodness and faithfulness of God!
6. The Day of , vv. 26-32.
The Day of has been considered in chapter 16. Coming at this season of the year it demonstrated the complete rest brought in, both for God and His people, through the expiation of their guilt.
How were the people on this day to express for their guilt (27)? (Cp. Is. 58:3-7; Zech. 7:5.) What penalty followed the absence of such (29)?
How do these great truths of sin, , expiation, rest, apply to the people of all ages?
7. The Feast of Tabernacles, vv. 33-43.
This is the greatest of the feasts When did it begin, what is it called, and how long aid it last? On what two days were "holy convocations" called?
What reference to the complete harvest is found in this enactment (39)? With what unusual feature was this feast to be celebrated (40)? What did the dwelling in booths commemorate (42, 43)? As the passover typified our through Christ, the unleavened bread our feeding upon Him for strength, the first sheaf His restoration from the dead, Pentecost the descent of the , or the spiritual ingathering of the first fruits of the world's harvest in the formation of the church, so the Feast of Tabernacles is thought to typify the completion of that harvest in the final ingathering of the at the end of the age. Then all that are Christ's shall either rise from the dead or be translated to meet Him in the air at the second coming (1 Thess. 4:13-18).
The eighth day after the feast is a type of that new week ushered in by the millennial age, when the earth and all that is therein shall experience the rest promised to the people of God (Zech. 14; 16; 21).
Questions.
1. Quote Phil. 4:4.
2. What feast may be said to be the "germ" of all the others?
3. To what does the weekly rest day look forward?
4. Of what is "leaven" always the type in Scripture?
5. Of what is the sheaf of the first-fruits the type?
6. Of what is the Feast of Weeks the type as compared with that of the first-fruits?
7. What was the great month of the Jewish year, and why?
8. Give the name, history and typical significance of the greatest of the feasts.
THE SABBATIC AND JUBILEE YEARS
Chapter 25
Considering the limited scope of this work, we pass over chapter 24, to give more attention to the subject of the present chapter, which, is closely connected with that of the "feasts" or "appointed seasons."
The Sabbatic Year.
It deals first with the Sabbatic year (1-7). From what were the Israelites prohibited in the seventh year (4)? How much further did the prohibition extend (5)? But while there should be no sowing, pruning or reaping for the year, nevertheless were all the spontaneous produce of the land to be a waste (6, 7)? What may have been God's object in this law?
Agricultural science recognizes that a periodic rest of land is of advantage, particularly where it is difficult to obtain fertilizers in adequate amount. But there must have been a deeper reason here, and we wonder whether the enactment was not intended as a discipline in faith towards God, teaching the Israelite that man does not live by bread alone (Cp. vv. 20-22; with Deut. 8:3). Then may not another thought have been to impress him that his right to the soil and its produce came from God? We can see also how such an enactment would curb selfishness and covetousness, and place the rich and the poor periodically on the same level. It has, of course, some symbolical and typical aspects as well, which will be considered later.
The Jubilee Year.
The chapter deals in the next place with the Jubilee year (8-12). In what month, and on what day did it begin (9)? What name was given to this day? By what ceremony was it introduced? What was the proclamation on this day (10)? Was it also a for the land (11)? Then, did two years come in immediate succession?
A question may arise as to how a new year could begin in the seventh month. But the answer is that Israel had two kinds of years. What might be called its religious year, began with the Feast of the Passover in the spring (Exodus 12), while its civil year began with the day of in the fall.
Liberty Proclaimed.
One feature of the "liberty" of the Jubilee year concerned the of the land (vv. 12-27:23, 24). In that year what must be returned to every man who had suffered a loss of it (13)? What was the basis of value in the purchase and sale of land (15, 16)? Since the possession must revert to the original holder in the year of Jubilee, it had only just so much value as there were years and crops intervening between the time it left his hand and the next Jubilee. What was the purpose or effect of this law (17)? What was its basis, or in other words, why could not the land be sold in perpetuity, but must be returned to its first holder (23)?
Observe from this that in Israel, under the theocracy, there was no such thing as either private or communal ownership of the land. The owner was Jehovah, and all any man could buy or sell was the right to its produce, and that only for a limited time.
The Kinsman Redeemer.
The law of the kinsman redeemer is an interesting feature of this subject (25-28).
If one for reasons of poverty was obliged to sell his land, whose duty was it to it for him did his circumstances permit (25)? Might the original possessor himself it (26)? Observe that the basis of price (27) was that referred to above. Observe also, that if it could not be in either case, then it must return to him at the Jubilee (28).