Comments on Leviticus

L. M. Grant.

 

PREFACE

 

While Genesis emphasizes the great subject of life in its beginnings, and Exodus considers God's principles of redemption and His authority established among a redeemed people, Leviticus (named for Levi, meaning “joined”) is the book of the sanctuary. Here we are brought into the very presence of God, so that sanctification to God and from all evil is the proper character of His saints.

Sanctification has two major aspects. First, sanctification by the one offering of Christ (Heb. 10: 10), which is God's work for us, putting the believer in a new position before God; the other, sanctification by the Spirit of God (1 Cor. 6: 11), which is God's work inwardly in the believer, causing him to be morally set apart to God. Both of these are implied in Leviticus.

Only on the basis of the sacrifice of Christ are we privileged to enter God's presence; therefore Leviticus begins with the various aspects of the value of that one great sacrifice. In all of this the holiness and truth of God are specially prominent, just as in Genesis His power and majesty are displayed, and in Exodus His righteousness and grace.

   

Leviticus 1

THE BURNT OFFERING

  

 (A) A BULL (vv. 1-9)

The first verse is significant of the character of the whole book of Leviticus. The Lord speaks to Moses from the tabernacle, His place of dwelling among the people. If we are to approach Him, it must be where He is, and on His terms. When we have been redeemed by Him and to Him, it is surely our desire to be near to Him, enjoying the light of His face. But this must be in His own way.

Therefore the burnt offering comes first, for this gives the most important aspect of the sacrifice of Christ. If one desired to offer a burnt sacrifice from the herd, this must be a male without blemish, a male because the burnt offering is altogether objective: all was to be offered in fire to the Lord. It was not in any way subjective, for the offerer has no part in the offering, as was true in the peace offering, which could be either a male or female (Lev. 3: 1). The words in verse 3, “of his own free will” (KJV) are rightly rendered “that he may be accepted” (NASB).

The offerer was to put his hand on the head of the bull, signifying his personal identification with the sacrifice. This was necessary if God was to accept the offering as applicable to the offerer, just as believers are to signify their personal identification with Christ in accepting Him by faith. Then the offerer must kill the bull before the Lord, and the priests would sprinkle the blood of the offering all around the copper altar. Following this the offerer was to skin the animal and cut it into its various pieces. Leviticus 7: 8 shows that the priest who offered the sacrifice was to keep the skin for himself. But all the rest of the animal, after the inwards and legs were washed, was to be laid in order on the altar and all burnt. Thus all was to go up in fire to God, for the most vital matter in the sacrifice of Christ is that in this God is glorified. The offerer is accepted, but this is simply the result of God being glorified. Our blessing through Christ's sacrifice is a lesser matter than God's glory. Indeed, if not one soul had been saved, yet God has been eternally honored by the work of Calvary. Yet the other offerings also were necessary as picturing other aspects of the value of Christ's sacrifice that involved the blessing of believers.

The cutting into various parts indicates that we are to value everything about Christ's sacrifice as being for God, and specially mentioned are the head (intelligence) the fat (typical of His devotion), the inwards, the hidden motives of His heart, and the legs (His walk). Thus the thoughts of the Lord Jesus were above all for God, His devotion was always Godward, His hidden motives were for God's glory, and His walk was always to please the Father. Thus the offering was “a sweet aroma to the Lord.” This is not said of the sin or trespass offerings.

  

 (B) A SHEEP OR A GOAT (vv 10-13).

A burnt offering could be a sheep or a goat. The bull (larger and stronger) would remind us that some have a more full recognition of the great value of the sacrifice of Christ than others have. It speaks of the strength of the offering. The sheep denotes the submission of Christ, and the goat His substitution. Again, only a male was acceptable, and the offerer was to kill the animal before the Lord, and the priests were to sprinkle the blood all around the altar. This offering was also to be cut in pieces, each piece laid in order on the wood placed in the copper altar. As with the bull, the head and the fat are specially mentioned, and the inwards and legs being washed before burnt with all the rest of the animal on the altar. All ascended in fire to God as “a sweet aroma.”

(C) TURTLEDOVES OR YOUNG PIGEONS (vv. 14-17)

One might be too poor to bring a bull or sheep or goat, and provision was made that he could bring turtledoves or young pigeons. This would tell us that whatever may be our poverty of apprehension of the greatness of Christ's sacrifice, yet there is still glory given to God in only recognizing that Christ is the true Man from heaven who came to sacrifice Himself, for the birds speak of His heavenly character.

In this case the offerer did not kill the bird, but the priest was to wring off its head, its blood being drained out at the side of the altar. Its crop and its feathers were removed and put into the place of the ashes. Then it was split at its wings, but not divided. For the heavenly glory of the Lord Jesus is higher than man can perceive, and therefore not to be divided, though the two things must be distinguished in Him, that is, His deity and His Manhood. Also those spiritually poor cannot easily discern the many characteristics of the Lord Jesus that are implied in the pieces of the bull or sheep or goat. Therefore, however different might be the apprehension of the sacrifice on the part of the offerer, the burnt offering was still acceptable to God: He receives glory from it. All three of these burnt offerings are called “a sweet aroma to the Lord.” All were burned, thus ascending in fire to God. The burnt offering aspect of the sacrifice of Christ is specially emphasized in John's Gospel.

Leviticus 2

THE MEAL OFFERING (vv. 1-16)

This offering is an appendix to the burnt offering. We do not read of a meal offering ever being offered alone, but in connection with the burnt offering or the peace offering. For this was not a blood sacrifice, and in approaching God a blood sacrifice was imperative. The meal offering does not speak at all of the blood shedding of the Lord Jesus, but rather of the perfection of His humanity displayed in His life on earth. In this respect His entire life was an offering to God, but it could not make atonement for man's sin.

A meal offering was to be of fine flour with oil poured on it and frankincense put on it. The fine flour reminds us that every particle of the milled grain symbolizes some detail of the perfection of the character of the Lord Jesus as a true Man. The oil speaks of the anointing of the Spirit of God, which marked Him out as the Man of God's special appointment. The frankincense is white and sweet smelling, symbolizing the purity of the life of the Lord Jesus, a life fragrant to His God and Father.

The offering was to be brought to the priests, one of whom was to take only a handful of fine flour and oil, with all the incense and burn this as a memorial on the altar. This part was a sweet aroma to the Lord. But the rest would belong to Aaron and his sons: it was to be eaten (vv. 2-3). What went up in fire to God speaks of God's appreciation of the person of the Lord Jesus in lowly humanity. What was eaten by the priests intimates the appreciation of Christ by all His saints, for today all believers are priests to God.

Three types of meal offerings are now considered, the first of which is that

 (A) BAKED IN THE OVEN (v. 4)

This could be either unleavened cakes of fine flour mixed with oil or unleavened wafers anointed with oil. The mixing with oil speaks of the permeating of the humanity of the Lord Jesus by the Spirit of God from His very birth. This was the very nature of His Manhood. Compare Luke 1: 35. Anointing with oil implies His being anointed by the Spirit of God at His baptism (Matt. 3: 16), in preparation for His great public ministry.

Baked in the oven indicates that He is a Sufferer, exposed to the heat of hidden sufferings. Inside an oven is where the heat is most intense, just as the unseen sufferings of the Lord Jesus were more intense than the sufferings to which men subjected Him outwardly. He felt the condition of mankind far more deeply than appeared on the surface. We may feel sorrow because of the evil all around us and for the way evil infiltrates the Church of God in its testimony on earth. He feels this more deeply than we, and when here on earth, His disciples did not enter into the sufferings of His heart, as in His weeping over Jerusalem (Luke 19: 41-44) and in His prayer in Gethsemane (Luke 22: 41-46).

(B) BAKED IN A PAN (vv. 5-6)

This oblation baked in a pan (or griddle) indicates open sufferings which the Lord endured from human enmity. Men's hostile words which issued eventually in their spitting, tearing out His hair, lashing Him, crowning Him with thorns, etc. were sufferings that draw out our deep admiration of Him, just as the cooking of the meal renders the result much more acceptable to the taste. “He learned obedience by the things which He suffered” (Heb. 5: 8). Suffering therefore has valuable results.

In the case of an offering baked in a pan, this was to be parted in pieces and oil poured on it. We can discern the distinctions in what the Lord Jesus suffered from one source or another, and we should have appreciation for every various detail of what He suffered. The oil poured on tells us that He was empowered by the Spirit of God to bear all these things with calm confidence in His God and Father.

 (C) COOKED IN A CAULDRON OR KETTLE (v. 7)

Though our King James Version calls this vessel a “frying-pan,” Young's Concordance defines it as a kettle, and both J.N.Darby's Version and the Numerical Bible use the word “cauldron.” In this case the offering was not baked, but cooked in water. Since water is a symbol of the Word of God, then it appears that this offering implies the sufferings of the Lord Jesus because of His obedience to God's Word and because of His faithfully declaring it (cf. Luke 4: 25-29 and John 10: 27-31). Neither “mixed with oil” or “anointed with oil” are mentioned here, but only “with oil,” but at least in every case the Spirit of God is involved.

 

INSTRUCTIONS COMMON TO ALL MEAL OFFERINGS (vv. 8-16)

All these offerings were to be brought to the Lord, being presented to the priest. At the altar the priest was to take a memorial portion (a handful — v. 2) and burn it on the altar as a sweet aroma to the Lord. What remained was for Aaron and his sons. Thus, God received His portion from that offering, Aaron (a type of Christ the High Priest) received his portion and each of the priests (typical of all believers) received their portion, — all thus sharing in appreciation of the perfections of the Man Christ Jesus in His life of devotion and willing suffering.

Leaven (yeast) was to be excluded from the meal offerings (v. 11), for leaven speaks of sin, and as to Christ, “in Him is no sin” (1 John 3:5). Besides this, honey was not to be used. Leaven is corrupting, but honey is not. Why then is honey excluded? Because, being the result of the bees' activity in gathering what is sweet and good, it speaks of the ministry of the Word gathered by believers for the benefit of the whole Church of God. However sweet our thoughts are concerning the offering of Christ, those thoughts are not to be mixed with the offering itself. In other words, the best ministry of saints cannot improve on the established truth of God concerning Christ: therefore, while good ministry is beneficial for men, it has no place in the actual worship of the Lord Jesus.

The offering of the firstfruits (v. 12), being not properly a meal offering, was not burned, though offered to the Lord.

Every meal offering was to be seasoned with salt, for salt is a preservative, in contrast to leaven, which corrupts. Salt crystallizes at right angles, and is typical of righteousness, with which we know every detail of the Lord's life was perfectly seasoned, — not too little, not too much.

 A MEAL OFFERING OF THE FIRSTFRUITS (vv. 14-16)

Though the offering of the firstfruits was not itself a meal offering (v. 12), yet part of the firstfruits could be offered as a meal offering. If so, it was to be of green heads of grain roasted by the fire, grain beaten from full heads. This speaks of the Lord Jesus in the freshness and vigor of His sinless life, as we are reminded by His words just before the cross, “If they do these things in the green wood, what will be done in the dry?” (Luke 23: 31). He was the green tree who had come out of a dry ground (Israel), as the one hope of prosperity for the nation (cf. Isaiah 53: 2). In refusing Him, Israel would be shown up in a coming day to be dry and desolate. What would be done then? How terrible a question! Their having judged the Lord Jesus would issue in a dreadfully burning judgment for them!

What a difference there would have been if they had valued Him as the meal offering roasted with fire, for He suffered much as the One devoted to the will of His Father. Let us at least appreciate the meal offering aspect of the offering of the Lord Jesus. Oil and frankincense were to be put on this offering, emphasizing the anointing of the Spirit of God and the fragrance to God of the Lord's life of pure devotion. The memorial of the offering was burned, and all the frankincense, for this was God's portion. He deeply values the perfection of the Manhood virtues of His beloved Son, every detail of His life as it is seen in the four Gospels. If God is so pleased with Him, then surely we should find great delight too in contemplating even the smallest details of His character, of His actions and of His words as He ministered in tender compassion to the need of mankind. Nor should we be impressed only with the gentle kindness of His ways with those in need, but with the faithfulness of His dealing with ungodly men, not fighting for His own rights, showing no resentment and no selfish or bitter response to men's bad treatment, yet firmly declaring the truth, warning them of the judgment to come and pressing upon them God's claims of truth and righteousness. Every aspect of His character is seen in beautiful harmony and balance.

 Leviticus 3  

THE PEACE OFFERING

 

 TAKEN FROM THE HERD (vv. 1-5)

The peace offering was also a voluntary sacrifice. However, it could either be a male or female, but only an unblemished animal. Of course it speaks also of the one sacrifice of Christ, but since a female was allowed, this involves the part that believers have with Christ in the value of His sacrifice. The burnt offering speaks altogether of the value of that sacrifice to God, but the peace offering involves also the blessing that comes to the believer by means of Christ's sacrifice.

Christ as the peace offering has established peace between God and men by means of His sacrifice, and this is seen especially in Luke's Gospel, so that grace, concord and fellowship are outstanding features of this offering.

As with the burnt offering, the offerer was to lay his hand on the head of the animal and kill it at the door of the tabernacle. Then the priests sprinkled the blood around the altar. However, all was not to be burned, as with the burnt offering, but only the fat that covered the inwards and the fat attached to the inwards, the two kidneys with the fat attached to them and the fatty lobe attached to the liver. These were to be burned as a sweet aroma to the Lord. This animal was from the herd. The fat always belonged to the Lord: it was not to be eaten, for it speaks of the energy of the devotion of the Lord Jesus to His God and Father. The two kidneys, purifying the blood by innumerable filters, picture the inner motives of the Lord Jesus, which are for God. At this time nothing is said of the parts that were to be given to the priest and the offerer: this subject is left for the law of the offering (Lev. 7: 11-21).

 CHOSEN FROM THE FLOCK (vv. 6-17)

A peace offering could also be of the flock, whether a lamb (v. 7) or a goat (v. 12). In each case also the offerer laid his hand on the head of the animal and killed it, and the priest sprinkled the blood around the altar (vv. 8-11 and 13-16). The parts removed from the animal are similar to those in verses 3 and 4, and these were burned, spoken of as “food, an offering made by fire to the Lord.” Thus, this offering of the Lord Jesus is for God Himself. Again this is “a sweet aroma” offering.

In Israel God insisted that it was a perpetual statute that they eat neither fat nor blood (v. 17). Today believers are warned definitely not to eat blood (Acts 15: 20). This restriction was introduced when God first allowed men to eat animals (Gen. 9: 3-4), long before the law was given to Israel. Neither at that time, nor under grace today is there any restriction as to eating fat, however. Most of us may find that our health is better if we refrain from eating fat, in spite of our liberty to do so.

Leviticus 4    

THE SIN OFFERING

 

 FOR CASES OF IGNORANCE (vv. 1-2)

The sin offering was for sins of ignorance, or inadvertence. These are things that we do not realize are sin and we easily fall into such things unintentionally. Why do we do this? Because we have a sinful nature inherited from Adam which leads even a believer into things he does not approve of. This gives him the struggle of Romans 7, as expressed in verse 19, “For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice.” We are not responsible for having the sinful nature, for we were born with it, but we are responsible for letting it express itself. Therefore, when one in Israel realized that he had sinned, however unintentional it had been, he must bring an offering to God.

Under law there was no sacrifice for the sins of willful disobedience. Numbers 15: 30 says, “But the person who does anything presumptuously — that one brings reproach on the Lord, and he shall be cut off from among his people.” Thus there was no sacrifice for David's sin (Ps. 51: 16). Under grace today, how wonderful the difference, for “the blood of Jesus Christ, His Son, cleanses us from all sin” (1 John 1: 7). So that we must distinguish between the literal application of these sacrifices to Israel, and the spiritual significance for them for us today.

 

 THE SIN OF AN ANOINTED PRIEST (vv. 3-12)

The sin of a priest was especially serious, because he was a representative of the people Godward. That sin must not be covered, but judged. Therefore the priest must offer a young bull without blemish as a sin offering. As with the burnt offering, he was to lay his hand of the head of the bull and kill it before the Lord at the door of the tabernacle. Then he was to dip his finger in the blood and sprinkle some of it seven times before the Lord in front of the veil of the sanctuary and also put some of the blood on the horns of the altar of sweet incense. This sprinkling was not the same as with the burnt offering, however, for that blood was sprinkled around the altar of burn offering, outside.

Some of the blood of the sin offering for the anointed priest was sprinkled in front of the veil of the sanctuary, some put on the horns of the altar of sweet incense, and the rest poured out at the base of the altar of burnt offering. We shall see that, in the case of the sin of a ruler or of one of the common people (vv. 22, 27) the blood was sprinkled as it was with the burnt offering, but in the case of the sin of the whole congregation of Israel (v. 13) the blood was sprinkled just as in the case of the sin of a priest.

The reason for this seems to be that the priest was the spiritual representative of the people and he had access into the sanctuary: therefore the sanctuary was “purged by blood” on his account. The case of the sin of the whole congregation is evidently connected in such a way with the priest as their representative that a similar ritual was necessary.

Again the fat was to be removed, the two kidneys and the fatty lobe attached to the liver, and these burned on the altar of burnt offering, as God's portion. But nothing of this offering was to be eaten by the offerer. All was to be carried outside the camp and burned where the ashes were poured out.

This was not a voluntary offering, but one required because of the priest's sin: therefore it was not a “sweet savor” offering, for it speaks of Christ suffering from God under the curse of our sins, in a place of total rejection “outside the camp.” This was true of all the sin offerings of which the blood was taken into the sanctuary (Heb. 13: 11), which included that for the priest and that for the whole congregation (vv. 6-6; 17-18). However, one day in the year, the great day of atonement, the high priest took the blood of the sin offering, not only into the first room of the holy place, but inside the veil, in the holiest of all, where he sprinkled the blood before and on the mercy seat (Lev. 16: 1-17). The body of the animal was burned outside the camp.

It might be that the whole congregation of Israel became involved in a sin that they did not at the time realize was sin. Their ignorance did not excuse them, however. When the sin was brought to their attention, then a sin offering was required. The connection of this with the sin of the priest seems very clear, for the instructions as to the sacrifice are just the same, except that it is the elders of the people who were to lay their hands on the head of the bull before its slaughter, for the elders represent the people.

This offering for the whole congregation appears to teach us that at the cross sin in its entirety was fully judged, not only individual sins. This would be a further reason for the animal being burned outside the camp, with the blood brought into the sanctuary to make atonement. This sin offering aspect of the sacrifice of Christ is emphasized in the Gospel of Mark.

 FOR A RULER (vv. 22-26)

A ruler was not a spiritual representative, as the priest was, yet he was in authority over the common people, so that his sin and that of one of the common people (v. 27) required the same treatment, except that a male goat was required for the ruler, a female for the subject. As to the priest and the whole congregation there was a marked difference.

Still, the ruler is typical of Christ, who willingly took the responsibility for our sins as though they had been His own. Indeed, when He is considered as King, Matthew writes of Him, “You shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins (Matt. 1: 21).

The male kid of the goats was used because the ruler is objectively the authority. Again he was to lay his hand on its head and kill it at the door of the tabernacle. As with the burnt offering, the priest was then to take some of the blood with his finger and put it on the horns of the copper altar and pour out the rest of the blood at the base of this altar. Then he was to burn all its fat on the altar. Thus his sin was forgiven. This does not speak of eternal forgiveness, but governmental, that is, for the time being, but it is typical of the value of the sacrifice of Christ as obtaining eternal forgiveness.

 

 FOR ONE OF THE COMMON PEOPLE (vv. 27-35).

In the case of the sin of ignorance on the part of one of the common people, the instructions were just the same as for a ruler, except that a female animal was required, and also that either a sheep or a goat was acceptable. The female was appropriate for a subject, for the female speaks of a subjective character, rather than objective, as in the case of a ruler. The goat is typical of Christ as Substitute, the lamb speaking of His lowly submission in sacrifice. The necessity of all of these offerings and the instructions concerning them should make a very real impression on the heart of every believer, for in this way we learn the horror of sin in God's sight and the infinite greatness of the sacrifice of Christ.

Leviticus 5  

 OFFERING FOR A SPECIFIC SIN (vv. 1-6)

The subject of the sin offering is continued in this chapter up to the end of verse 13. It is a descending scale, for the specific sin has to be brought to the attention of the offender, and the offering made, but allowance also made for a lesser offering in the case of poverty. Verse 1 is a sin of omission. One may hear and know of a matter of serious importance and yet not report it. In law this is called misprision, but it is sin before God. “The voice of adjuration” put one under solemn obligation to bear witness to what he knew was true. Thus, though the Lord said nothing in defense of Himself before the Sanhedrim, yet when the high priest adjured Him in God's name, He answered what was true, that He is the Christ, the Son of God (Matt. 26: 63-64).

Also, touching the dead carcass of an animal would involve one in defilement, or touching a human who was defiled by any type of uncleanness, though this happened inadvertently (vv. 2-3). Or one might thoughtlessly swear an oath that he afterward realized was sinful (v. 4). Touching an unclean thing was of course simply ceremonial defilement, but pictures for us any associations we may make that are morally corrupt. If we identify ourselves with others living corruptly, we too shall be defiled by this.

When any such things were brought to a person's attention, he was to confess that he had sinned in that thing. How good it is when such a confession is made, with no excuses added!

In verse 6, because a trespass offering was here required, some have thought this introduces the subject of the trespass offering, but a sin offering and a burnt offering were also required (vv. 6-7), and then the sin offering is emphasized in verses 8 and 9. Properly speaking, the subject of the trespass offering begins in verse 14. But the trespass offering and the sin offering (v. 6) were both brought, a female from the flock, or a kid of the goats as a sin offering. This shows a close connection between the two offerings, for the act of disobedience (requiring a trespass offering) exposes the disobedient character of the person, that is, his sinful nature, which is emphasized in the sin offering.

 

 BIRDS IN PLACE OF ANIMALS (vv. 7-10)

One who was unable to bring a lamb would be allowed to bring two turtledoves or two young pigeons as a sacrifice. This pictures one who is poor in his apprehension of the value of the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus as fully atoning for sin. At least he recognizes that the Lord Jesus is from heaven (pictured by the birds), therefore above him, and though his understanding is weak, God receives his offering.

The birds' heads were to be wrung off, symbolizing the intelligence being set apart, but otherwise no division of the parts of the bird was allowed, for the birds speak of the heavenly character of the Lord Jesus, which is above our ability to discern. Some of the blood was then sprinkled on the side of the altar and the rest drained out at the base of the altar. The first bird was for a sin offering, no doubt offered in accordance with Leviticus 1: 14-17.

 A MEAL OFFERING INSTEAD OF A BLOOD SACRIFICE (vv. 11-13)

Because of poverty one might not be able to bring even the birds for an offering. In this case the grace of God allowed an offering of one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour, a small amount, but unlike other meal offerings, no oil or incense was put on it, because it was a sin offering. Since no blood was involved, it could not properly be atoning. It speaks of the purity of the Man Christ Jesus, however, and if there is in the offender a true regard for the person of Christ, though he has no understanding of the value of Christ's work of redemption, God can still graciously receive this offering, making this concession for ignorance.

There is no sweet savor in this, for it is a sin offering. A handful of this was taken by the priest and burned on the altar, and the remainder was the priest's, as was the case with a meal offering. Thus, God was given His part and the priest (typical of Christ) was given his.

 

THE TRESPASS OFFERING (vv. 14 to Lev. 6: 7)

 

 TRESPASS GODWARD (vv. 15-19)

The trespass offering deals with sin also, but not simply in its general evil character, rather in its being injurious either to God or to people. These are said to be sins of ignorance also. In this section sin in sacred things is first mentioned. For this a ram without blemish was to be offered, and also silver according to the proper estimation of the injury done. The trespass must be fully paid for, but a fifth part also added. Only this could be considered making proper amends.

Thus, the Lord Jesus has not only paid the penalty for the sin that Adam introduced into the world, but has gone beyond this, as Romans 5:17 tells us. He has not only restored what Adam lost, but much more. Adam lost earth, but Christ has introduced heavenly blessing for us.

Leviticus 6

 TRESPASS MANWARD (vv. 1-7).

Though this trespass is directly involved with another person, yet it is “against the Lord,” for He is Creator and concerned about how His creatures are treated. One may have lied to his neighbor in reference to something that had been entrusted to him to keep or as to a pledge he had made, or he may have actually cheated his neighbor in some way. Or he may have found what was lost and instead of restoring it to its owner, he had sworn falsely about it. This could not be said to be a sin of ignorance, but he may have resorted to lying because of fear or weakness. Yet he must then not cover the matter over, but confess his sin and fully restore anything that the neighbor had lost and add one-fifth to the value of it.

The offering he must make also was the same as in the case of trespass in sacred things, a ram without blemish. Thus people would be restrained from such trespass by knowing they would lose by it when it came to light. But the offering was intended to direct men's hearts to something higher, though they could not realize its symbolical significance until Christ Himself was offered for our sins. Yet many must have realized that there was in the offerings a significance higher than they understood. They would recognize this in the measure in which they believed that God was wiser than they. For the time being also the offering gave a governmental forgiveness, but not the eternal forgiveness that is found only in the one sacrifice of Christ.

 

THE LAW OF THE BURNT OFFERING (vv. 8-13)

In contrast to the sin offering which was to be offered once a year, except for specific occasions of sin, the burnt offering was to be continual. There was an evening and morning sacrifice, and the fire on the altar was never to be put out. The significance of this is plain. There is never a time when God does not receive honor from the value of the sacrifice of Christ. For we have seen that the burnt offering all ascended to God in fire, so that it speaks of that aspect of the sacrifice of Christ that is all for the glory of God.

Evidently every morning the priest must put on his linen garments, (which emphasize the moral purity of the Lord Jesus as Great High Priest) and remove the ashes from the altar and put these beside the altar. Even that which was burned was not to be treated carelessly. For then the priest changed his garments and carried the ashes outside the camp to a clean place. What remained was only the reminder that the sacrifice had done its work. Thus the sacrifice of Christ will never be forgotten.

 

THE LAW OF THE MEAL OFFERING (vv. 14-23)

We have seen that the meal offering is a virtual appendix to the burnt offering. It speaks of Christ, not in His atoning sufferings, but in the purity of sinless Manhood in all His life on earth. Any meal offering, voluntarily brought by one of the people must have a handful of the meal taken, with its oil and all its incense, by the priest, and burned on the altar as a sweet aroma to the Lord. No incense was left for the priest.

The offering must not be baked with leaven, and the remainder was given to the priests to eat. Also anyone who touched this offering was thereby sanctified (or holy). This illustrates the sanctifying power of a personal relationship with the Lord Jesus.

 

THE DAILY MEAL OFFERING (vv. 19-23)

This deals with the meal offering on behalf of the priests. Beginning from the day the priests were anointed, they were to bring a meal offering of one tenth of an ephah of fine flour, offering one half of it in the morning and one half at night. Thus it was offered along with the continual burn offering (vv. 9-12). This was made in a pan with oil, and offered as a sweet savor to the Lord, which seems to infer that incense was offered with it. But the priests could not partake of this offering: it was to be wholly burned (vv. 22-23)

 

THE LAW OF THE SIN OFFERING (vv. 24-30)

Verse 25 is a repetition of what has before been said of the sin offering. It was to be killed in the same place as the burnt offering, before the Lord. It was most holy. But verse 26 adds what had not been said before: the priest who offered it was to eat its flesh in the holy place. This would be in the case of the sin of a ruler or one of the people, for in the cases where the blood of the sin offering was taken into the sanctuary, nothing was to be eaten by the priest.

The eating of the sin offering by the priest signifies his entering into and feeling the seriousness of the sin as though it had been his own, just as the Lord Jesus confessed Israel's sins as though He had been responsible for them (Ps. 40: 12; Ps. 69: 5-6). Whatever touched the flesh of the animal would be holy, which speaks of any personal connection with the sacrifice of Christ being the means of sanctifying us from the guilt of sin, for the touching speaks of the touch of faith.

As well as everyone being constituted holy through touching the flesh of the sin offering, we are told that any garment on which the blood of the sacrifice was sprinkled was to be washed with water (v. 27). Garments speak of habits, and if our habits are brought in contact with the truth of the blood-shedding of Christ, these habits must be cleansed from defilement by the washing of water by the Word of God.

If the offering was boiled in an earthen vessel, the vessel was to be broken, never used again. But if boiled in a copper pot, the pot was to be scoured afterwards and rinsed in water. Then scripture adds that all the males among the priests may eat the flesh. For even wives of the priests were not considered priests under law. Today, under grace, all believers, male and female, are priests (1 Peter 2: 5), so that there is no select class of priests in any official position.

Verse 30, however, insists that no sin offering was to be eaten if its blood was brought into the sanctuary: it was to be burned.

Leviticus 7

THE LAW OF THE TRESPASS OFFERING (vv. 1-10)

In common with all the other offerings, the trespass offering was “most holy.” It was to be killed in the same place as the burnt offering. Its blood was to be sprinkled all around on the altar. The fat tail, the fat that covered the entrails, the two kidneys and the fat that was on them, and the fatty lobe attached to the liver were to be removed and burnt on the altar by the priest. These all speak of characteristics of Christ that are entirely for God's appreciation: all are offered in fire to Him (vv. 3-5).

As with the sin offering, every male among the priests was to eat of it in the holy place, for the trespass offering was like the sin offering. The difference is only in the fact that the sin offering deals with the root principle of sin, while the trespass offering is for specific occurrences, and even the root principle is exposed by the occurrences. The priest who offered the animal was the one to receive its flesh.

A note is added in verse 8 as to the burnt offering. The flesh of it was all burned, so the priest would have nothing of this, but he was given the skin of the burnt offering.

Also the priest's part in the meal offering is repeated here (v. 9). After the handful was removed and burned on the altar, the offering priest received the rest. So that in all of these offerings the priest (typically Christ) had some part, — the burnt offering, meal offering, sin offering and trespass offering. The peace offering is not mentioned here because it was preeminently the shared offering, but it was necessary to insists that in all the offerings the priest was given some part, though no part to eat in the burnt offering — only the skin. Of course there was one exclusion, for the sin offering whose blood was brought into the sanctuary was totally burned outside the camp, including the skin (Lev. 16: 17), after the fat had been burned on the altar.

One contrast, however, is to be noted in regard to the meal offering. While the sin offering and the trespass offering were to be eaten by the offering priest, the meal offering was to be shared by all the priests — “to one as much as the other” (v. 10).

 

THE LAW OF THE PEACE OFFERING (vv. 11-38)

We have seen in Leviticus 3 that the peace offering could be either a male or female: it could be of the herd (a bull or calf) or a sheep or a goat. Now we find other instructions concerning this, dealing first with the reasons for offering a peace offering.

It might be offered as “a thanksgiving” (v. 12), that is, some special reason for thankfulness to God gives occasion to it. For the peace offering does not merely speak of our recovery from hostility, but of the peace of true accord with the mind of God, and therefore of genuine communion with Him. In this case, along with the animal offered, a meal offering of unleavened cakes mingled with oil, unleavened wafers anointed with oil, or cakes of blended flour mixed with oil was to be brought. One of these cakes was to be offered as a heave offering, after which it belonged to the offering priest (v. 14).

There was no question of sin in the offering, but rather of true communion with God. In this the sacrifice of Christ has a vital part, as does also the purity of His person as the sinless Son of Man — permeated by the Spirit of God, or anointed by the Spirit. As such He brings His saints into the presence of God to share in the great value of His work accomplished for them. The heave offering completed the picture by its representing the Lord as risen from the dead. We commune with One who has died, but is risen! The offering for thanksgiving was to be eaten only on the same day it was offered (v. 15). For when once we have occasion to give thanks to God for some special reason, this is completed that same day. Will we not always have some occasion the next day, and indeed every day, for fresh thanksgiving?

As well as an offering for thanksgiving, the peace offering might be a vow or a voluntary offering. In both these cases the offering could be eaten both the day it was offered and the next day. The Lord Jesus has plainly forbidden us to make vows today (Matt. 5: 33-37), for man in the flesh has been proven untrustworthy by the law of God, and we cannot promise what we may do in the future. Yet the vow would not doubt speak of the purpose of heart to devote oneself to the Lord in obedient faith. This is right, but not an actual vow. There is energy involved in this more than in a thanksgiving, so it was eaten two days.

The voluntary offering, however, was not because of a single matter for thanksgiving, but a spontaneous appreciation of the Lord Himself. This too involved more energy than did one occasion of thanksgiving, so it could be eaten the second day; but if any remained later than the second day, it was to be burned (v. 17). If one should eat it the third day, this could not be accepted, but would be an abomination to the Lord, rendering the eater guilty (v. 18).

As to the flesh of the peace offerings, while the priest and the offerer were privileged to eat of these. yet if the flesh touched any unclean thing, it was not to be eaten (v. 19). Simply the association with uncleanness was defiling. If the flesh was clean, those who were clean could eat of it. But if one ate of this offering while he was unclean, he was to be “cut off from his people” (v. 20). Death may seem a harsh sentence for such a thing, but the Lord intends to press upon us the seriousness of pretending to have fellowship with Him while indulging in sinful practices.

Also, the person who touched any unclean things, whether human uncleanness or an unclean animal, or anything of an abominable unclean nature, and in that condition ate the flesh of the sacrifice, was similarly sentenced to death (v. 21). This was not a question of personal uncleanness, but simply of association with uncleanness. Thus today, in Christendom, there are innumerable cases of unclean doctrine and practice introduced, and the Christian is warned, “Come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord. Do not touch what is unclean, and I will receive you “ (2 Cor. 6: 17).

WARNINGS AS TO EATING FAT AND BLOOD (vv. 22-29)

Since the flesh of the peace offering could be eaten, some might be inclined to rationalize that the fat and blood should not be withheld from them. Many today rationalize in such a way, for they do not distinguish things that differ. Therefore God insists as He had done often before, that the fat of any offerings was never to be eaten. For it speaks of the energy of the Lord's devotion to His Father, and therefore it was for God alone. Disobedience to this law was also punishable by death (v. 25).

The eating of the blood of animals or birds is also again absolutely forbidden (vv. 26-27). This prohibition was introduced at the time that animals were first allowed to be eaten as food (Gen. 9: 3-5). Blood was never to be eaten, and this is as true today as it was then (Acts 15: 28-29). As to eating fat, this was forbidden only in cases of animals being sacrificed (v. 25). But any eating of blood was punishable by death, under law (v. 27). Such a sentence is not to be carried out under grace, though eating blood is just as seriously wrong today as at any time. For “the blood is the life,” and we must in this matter recognize God's rights as the lifegiver.

 THE SPECIAL PORTION OF AARON AND HIS SONS (vv. 28-36)

Though this continues the law of the peace offering, it is again stated, “The Lord spoke unto Moses,” as was true also in verse 22. This indicates some special emphasis in both cases. While the offerer was to eat part of the peace offering, this is not mentioned here, but rather what Aaron and his sons were to share. Aaron is typical of Christ, and his sons speak of God's saints as worshipers. When the offering was brought to the Lord, the breast was waved as a wave offering to the Lord and given to Aaron and his sons. The sacrifice of course speaks of Christ sacrificed on Calvary, but the wave breast reminds us of His exaltation in heaven, the breast indicating the warmth of His love flowing out now, which is wonderful food for true worshipers to feed upon. It is surely of Christ as glorified that we read, “He will rest in His love, He will exult over thee with singing”(Zeph. 3: 17 — JND).

The right thigh of the heave offering was also to be given to Aaron and his sons. The heave offering was simply to be lifted up, signifying the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, while the wave offering, being waved, symbolizes His ascension and heavenly exaltation. The right thigh speaks of strength, typically the power of Christ's resurrection, a fitting complement to the warmth of love implied in the wave breast.

From the time Aaron and his sons were anointed as priests, they were entitled to have those parts of the peace offering (v. 36).

Leviticus 8

 THE CONSECRATION OF AARON AND HIS SONS (vv. 1-36)

The consecration of Aaron and his sons is typical of what is involved in the establishing of all believers as priests in this present day of grace. The garments, the anointing oil, a bull, two rams and a basket of unleavened bread all have an important part in this (v. 2). All the congregation of Israel was to be gathered for this event (vv. 3-4) at the entrance of the tabernacle, and Moses announced that they were acting on the commandment of God.

First Aaron and his sons were washed with water. This is typical of “the washing of regeneration” (Titus 3: 5). Compare also John 13: 10. It is not cleansing by blood, which has to do with God's justice being satisfied by the death of Christ for us. The washing or bathing in water is rather typical of God's cleansing work within us, that is, new birth, which makes a difference in our character and actions. Therefore a priest must be born again by God. Of course this is not true of the Lord Jesus, in whom there is no sin, and who always had the nature of God. But the washing of Aaron would remind us that Christ, being Himself “separate from sinners,” has identified Himself in grace with all those who partake of the divine nature.

The tunic then was put on Aaron, an under garment of fine linen (Ex. 28: 39). This speaks of the inward purity of the Lord Jesus. The sash for the tunic was added in order to bind the tunic in place. This speaks of the Lord's inner thoughts and motives being kept in perfect control.

Then the robe of the ephod was put on Aaron. It was blue in color, reminding us that Christ is God's High Priest, “made higher than the heavens” (Heb. 7: 26). Then the intricately woven band was added to tie the ephod in place. The breastplate was put on the ephod with the urim and thummim (the 12 precious stones) set in the breastplate. Urim and thummim means (lights and perfections,” for the stones reflect the light and symbolize the varied beauties and perfections of the Lord Jesus, as are reflected in the twelve tribes of Israel, or at least will be reflected when the nation is brought to God and blessed in the millennial age.

The turban was next placed on Aaron's head, a covering that reminds us that every thought of the Lord Jesus was always perfectly kept in subjection to His God and Father. The golden plate was put in the forepart of the turban, with its inscription, “Holiness to the Lord.” Thus, the Lord's thoughts were always consistent with the absolute holiness of God.

After this, Moses anointed with oil the tabernacle and all its inner furniture, and sprinkled some of the oil on the altar of burnt offering seven times, with all its utensils, and also the laver and its base. Thus the tabernacle and all the furniture connected with it were consecrated.

Then Aaron alone (not his sons) was anointed with oil (v. 12). This is typical of the Lord Jesus being anointed with the Spirit of God when He was baptized by John (Matt. 3: 13-16)

Only after this do we find Aaron's sons associated with him. Their tunics, sashes and headgear were put on them (v. 13). But they were not yet anointed. First, the bull of the sin offering had to be offered, with Aaron and his sons laying their hands on its head. Then Moses killed the bull. Thus the priestly family is identified with the high priest in appropriating the value of the sacrifice. So believers today are identified with Christ in sharing the value of His great sacrifice. The blood was put on the horns of the altar, with the remainder poured out at the base of the altar. The fat and the kidneys were burned on the altar, but the rest of the animal was burned totally outside the camp. This appears to be one exception as to the blood of the sin offering brought inside the tabernacle, but it was specially commanded by God (v. 17).

The application of these things is emphasized now in the offering of the second ram, the ram of consecration (v. 22). The basis of the truth of God concerning sacrifice was laid first, for this is objective, so that the subjective appropriation of this is seen in the ram of consecration. Again Aaron and his sons lay their hands on its head. Moses killed it, and instead of first putting the blood on the altar, he took some of the blood and put it on the tip of Aaron's right ear, on the thumb of his right hand and on the big toe of his right foot. Then he did the same on Aaron's sons, and afterward sprinkled the blood all around on the altar.

Thus Aaron alone was first anointed with blood following his previous anointing with oil (v. 12). So Christ was anointed with the Spirit when baptized by John, then with blood when He shed His blood at Calvary. After this Aaron's sons were anointed with blood before they were anointed with oil, just as believers were first cleansed by the shedding of the blood of Christ before receiving the Spirit of God at Pentecost (Acts 2).

In verses 23 and 24 the blood put on the right ear speaks of the hearing of the priests being consecrated to God. They are to have an ear above all for God's Word. Blood on the thumb indicates their works are to be consecrated to God; and blood on the big toe speaks of their walk also consecrated to Him. As it was absolutely true of the Lord Jesus, so it is properly true of believers.

Still, the consecration was not yet complete. The fat and the two kidneys of the ram and the right thigh were taken by Moses. Then one unleavened cake from the basket of unleavened bread, a cake anointed with oil and one wafer, were placed on the fat and on the right thigh. These were then given to Aaron and his sons to wave as a wave offering before the Lord. Thus the significance of the present exultation of the Lord Jesus is emphasized, for He not only died for us, but lives for us in the power of an endless life. Afterward this was all burned on the altar of burnt offering for a sweet aroma to the Lord.

Then Moses waved the breast of the ram as a wave offering before the Lord, and kept it for himself. The two wave offerings (of the priests and of Moses) insist on the heavenly character of the priesthood of Christ and of believers also. The actual consecration of the priests is accomplished when Moses sprinkled the anointing oil on Aaron and his garments and on his sons and their garments. Thus Aaron was anointed twice, first alone (v. 12), then together with his sons. His first anointing is typical of Christ's being anointed by the Spirit when John baptized him (Matt. 3: 16). His second anointing is typical of what Peter speaks of in Acts 2: 33. When Christ was exalted to the right hand of God He received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, whom He immediately shared with His saints by sending Him at Pentecost.

Personally Christ received the Spirit before His sacrifice, but the saints of God could only receive Him after Christ had shed His blood for them. Our sins must first be cleansed away by His blood before the Spirit could possibly come to us. Christ Himself, being without sin, received the Spirit apart from the shedding of His blood; yet afterward, in order to identify Himself with His saints in grace, He shares the value of His blood-shedding with them, and the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Following this, Moses tells Aaron to boil the remaining flesh of the offering at the door of the tabernacle, and together with his sons eat this with the bread from the basket of consecration offerings (v. 31). Whatever remained over was to be burned. Thus they were to assimilate that which speaks of Christ and His offering, just as we who are made priests today are to first feed upon Christ before we can function as priests. Yet none of us will appropriate all that is involved in the person and work of Christ, but God can, as the extra is offered to Him in fire.

With all of this being done, the priests were not yet allowed to do any service for the people: they were commanded to remain inside the door of the tabernacle for seven days, the number of completeness (v. 33). They must first learn what it means to be in the place of communion with God before being entrusted with service for others. How true this is for us too. Only by being in calm, sustained communion with God can we be fitted to rightly represent Him before others. This was so important that if they disobeyed they would expose themselves to the death penalty (v. 35). However, we are told in verse 36 that Aaron and his sons obeyed the word of God.

Leviticus 9

THE BEGINNING OF PRIESTLY MINISTRY (vv. 1-24)

Having completed all the instructions concerning the offerings and their laws, and now also having completed the consecration of the priests, Moses indicates the beginning of the priestly service in connection with the people. This was on “the eighth day,” for it was a new beginning for the people as regards their relationship to God. Moses addressed both Aaron and his sons and the elders of Israel. Aaron was to offer a young calf and a ram for a burnt offering, while the children of Israel were to offer a kid of the goats for a sin offering, a calf and a lamb, both yearlings, for a burnt offering, a bull and a ram for peace offerings and a meal offering mingled with oil. The reason for this is said to be “for today the Lord will appear unto you” (v. 4).

Since this began a new relationship to God, with the appearing of God to them in grace, all four of these fundamental offerings are required. The only one not required was a trespass offering, for it dealt only with specific cases of personal guilt, while the sin offering dealt with the basic sinful nature of man. The burnt offering emphasizes God's rights and God's glory, the peace offering speaks of peaceful accord and communion between God and men through this one sacrifice. The meal offering insists on the perfection of the lowly Manhood of the Lord Jesus.

It may seem that there is a great deal of repetition in connection with these offerings, but this is not without serious reason. The sacrifice of Christ has been the most amazing and significant fact of all history, and God wants its significance deeply impressed on every soul of mankind. Believers know how easily we let slip the remembrance of the wonder of the cross. Because of our tendency to forget, the Lord Jesus instituted the observing of the Lord's supper, the breaking of bread, saying, “Do this in remembrance of Me” (Luke 22: 19).

Bringing the animals, etc. that Moses had commanded, all the congregation came and stood before the Lord, to hear Moses declare what the Lord had commanded, on the basis of which alone the Lord could appear to them (vv. 5-6).

  

  OFFERINGS FOR AARON (vv. 7-14)

First Moses tells Aaron to offer his sin offering and burnt offering, which is said to be for himself and for the people. Though it was primarily for Aaron, yet he was the representative of the people, so that they are seen as linked together (v. 9). Secondly, however, Aaron was told to offer the offering of the people to make atonement for them. For, though the people are in one sense linked with Aaron, yet in another sense they were distinct from Aaron, and both aspects have to be regarded, just as in one sense believers are linked with Christ and in another sense are altogether distinct from Him.

When the calf of the sin offering for Aaron was killed, his sons brought the blood to him. He dipped his finger in the blood and put this on the horns of the altar of burnt offering, then poured the rest of the blood out at the base of the altar. All the fat and the kidneys were burned on the altar, as the Lord had commanded, for the fat speaks of the perfect devotion of the Lord Jesus to His Father and the kidneys His inner motives, which only God can rightly enjoy. The flesh and the hide of the animal he burned outside the camp. Though no mention is made of blood brought into the sanctuary, yet since this was an offering for the high priest, the priests were not to eat of it: all was to be burned (Lev. 4: 3-12).

Next the burnt offering for Aaron was killed. Aaron's sons presented to him the blood, which he sprinkled all around the altar. Then his sons brought to him the various parts of the animal with its head, and these he burned on the altar, for this was a sweet aroma to the Lord. But only when the inwards and legs were washed were they burned also on the altar. The waste, which speaks of defilement, must be washed away, for there was absolutely nothing defiling in the sacrifice of Christ. The inward physical defilement of the animal and the outward defilement of its legs symbolizes the inward spiritual defilement of all mankind and the outward defilement of our walk. In Christ there was absolutely nothing of this, so the animal's inwards and legs had to be washed in order to give a little indication of the purity of the Lord Jesus.

 

 OFFERINGS FOR THE PEOPLE (vv. 15-24)

Now the goat for the people's sin offering was killed. The goat speaks of Christ as the Substitute for His people. We are told it was offered “like the first one,” but nothing more is said of it. Actually, it was not to be burned as was the calf for Aaron, but its flesh eaten by the priests (cf. Lev. 9: 16-18).

The sacrifice of the burnt offering is only mentioned briefly in verse 16, but it was offered in the prescribed manner. This offering involved both a calf and a lamb, both yearlings (v. 3). Then the meal offering was brought and a handful taken and burned on the altar beside the burnt offering (v. 17). Since it was not a blood offering, it was offered along with a blood offering. It speaks of the perfection of the humanity of Christ.

More is said concerning the bull and the ram as a sacrifice of peace offerings, for this speak of the strength of the offering as bringing Israel into communion with God initially. When Aaron killed these animals, his sons brought the blood to him, which he sprinkled all around on the altar (v. 18). Thus, redemption by blood was accomplished. All the fat and the kidneys of both animals were first put on the breasts, then burned in the fire. The breasts were not burned, for they were given to Aaron and his sons (Lev. 7: 31) after they were waved, together with the right thigh (vv. 20-21) But the fat was first put on the breasts before being burned to indicate that, though the fat was all for God, yet the priests were expected to have an appreciation of the fact that the fat did belong solely to God, just as believers today have reason to deeply appreciate the total devotion to God that is manifest in the Lord Jesus. We have before seen that the waving of the offering speaks of the ascension to glory of the Lord Jesus following His sacrifice, for priestly work is necessarily connected with His place in heaven today.

Having completed the offerings, Aaron could then lift up his hands to bless the people, which reminds us of the Lord Jesus in Luke 24: 50, having completed His work of redemption, lifting up His hands in blessing to the disciples, for the basis of all blessing is the one great sacrifice of the Lord Jesus.

Then Moses and Aaron went into the tabernacle (v. 13), typical of the Lord Jesus entering heaven after His resurrection; but again coming out, and again blessing the people. The first blessing speaks of that to the Church immediately following the resurrection of the Lord, and this continues all the time the Lord Jesus is presently exalted on the Father's throne. But He will again come forth at the time when Israel is to be blessed with wonderful millennial blessing. Moses is typical of Christ as Ruler, and Aaron speaks of Him as High Priest, for in the coming day Israel will recognize Him both as King and Priest, so will have both the blessing of proper rule and that of mediatorship.

At this time the glory of the Lord appeared to all the people, as indeed at the time of His coming in majestic glory, all the world will be subdued by the light of His manifestation. Attending this, fire came out from before Him to consume the burnt offering and the fat on the altar. Thus God indicated His acceptance of the offering, and He Himself was glorified.

In two ways the people were affected by this. First, they shouted, indicating their appreciation of what was manifestly the Lord's victory (cf. Num. 23: 21). Secondly, they fell on their faces, showing their willing humbling of themselves before Him, subdued at the recognition of His majesty.

Leviticus 10

FAILURE IN THE PRIESTHOOD (vv. 1-7)

Priestly ministry had barely begun when those entrusted with it failed seriously. Two of Aaron's four sons put in their censers incense other than that which the Lord had commanded, and offered this in fire before the Lord (v. 1). Notice that it is not said the Lord commanded that they should not do what they did, but He had not commanded them to do it. This is most serious where worship of the Lord is concerned. Only what He has indicated is acceptable to Him. If we add any humanly conceived notions to this, God will consider it “strange fire.” In some areas of life we may have no explicit directions from the Lord, and where this is true we must not dare to lay down our own regulations, but it is wise always to seek the Lord's guidance in the scriptures, for this is the one safe preservative for us.

God's displeasure with Nadab and Abihu was immediately and strongly expressed in His sending out fire to consume them. He had before (Lev. 9: 24) sent fire to consume the burnt offering, in token of His acceptance of it; but this fire did not consume the offering, but the offerers, indicating God's refusal of their offering. Though He may not bring the same swift judgment today, yet any man-devised pretensions of worship are just as abominable to Him as this strange fire of Nadab and Abihu.

Moses discerned just what was involved in this, and told Aaron that God was indicating by such an infliction the fact that He must be regarded as holy, that is, as set apart from all that is merely men's conception, and glorified above and before all the people. This was especially important at the institution of the public worship of Himself. Aaron at the time was wise enough to say nothing.

The cousins of Nadab and Abihu were called upon to carry the bodies of the offenders outside the camp to bury them (vv. 4-5). Then Moses instructed Aaron and his two remaining sons not to even uncover their heads and not to tear their clothes (which in Israel was a sign of mourning). It was not consistent with priestly character to show signs of mourning, for the priest is one who draws near to God, in whose presence mourning has no place. A priest was never to tear his garments, though Caiaphas did this when interrogating the Lord Jesus (Matt. 26: 65), a trespass for which the law demanded the death penalty. For above all, the High Priest is typical of the Lord Jesus. Will His garments of priestly dignity every be torn? Absolutely not! For this would indicate some failure or fault in His priestly work. Thank God this is impossible. He remains faithful and true forever!

The rest of Israel could mourn for Nadab and Abihu, but the priests were told to remain in the tabernacle at this time because the anointing oil of the Lord was upon them. The oil is typical of the Holy Spirit whose power is such as to lift the soul above every circumstance of sorrow. Thus we may learn today that in the Lord's presence (the holy place), where the Spirit of God pervades the atmosphere, we may rise above the sorrows of earth, in holy confidence and peace.

 FITTING PRIESTLY BEHAVIOR (vv. 8-20)

The Lord now speaks directly to Aaron to forbid him and his sons to drink wine or other intoxicating drinks when they were serving in the tabernacle, lest this should lead to their death (v. 9). They were to have their minds unclouded so as to be able to distinguish between what was unclean and what was holy. It may be that Nadab and Abihu had had their minds impaired because of liquor.

Liquor was not forbidden generally to the people, though they were warned against drunkenness. But a priest was in a special place of responsibility, and in the service of God he was not to allow his mind to be impaired. The mother of Solomon also warned him that it was not for kings to drink wine or strong drink (Prov. 31: 4-5) lest this should impair their ability to govern fairly. Believers today, who are both kings and priests (Rev. 1: 6) should take this to heart, and not indulge in anything that might becloud their sober discernment and wisdom in bearing witness to the Lord. For we might be intoxicated by pleasures or other things that would affect our judgment just as liquor might.

Besides this, the priest should be in proper control of his mind in order to teach the children of Israel all the statutes that the Lord had laid down for them (v. 11). This is an honorable privilege and one that should always exercise the teacher to practice self-discipline.

Moses then instructed Aaron, Eleazar and Ithamar to eat all that remained of the meal offerings, doing so without leaven. This is said to be the due of Aaron and his sons. God had decided this, and whatever God provides us in a spiritual way we should rightly respond by appropriating it. The breast of the wave offering and the thigh of the heave offering are specifically mentioned (v. 14). The priests were to thus (typically) enter into the affections of Christ as glorified in heaven (the breast waved), and into “the power of His resurrection” (the thigh heaved). The entire family of the priests was to share in this, daughters as well as sons, just as the entire priestly family today (all saints) is called to enjoy such spiritual blessing. The repetition of verse 15 is to emphasize the importance of this provision of which the priestly family was responsible to partake.

However, in verse 16 we are told that when Moses inquired about the goat of the sin offering, he found that it had all been burned. Therefore he was angry with Eleazar and Ithamar, questioning why they had not eaten this sin offering in the holy place, since its blood had not been taken into the sanctuary (v. 15). This offering was for the people, and the priests' eating it symbolized the fact of the priests entering into and feeling the guilt of the people as though it had been their own. This is what the Lord Jesus did in the fullest way, even taking that guilt upon His own shoulders in going to the cross. Every believer should have this same attitude. It will make us true intercessors rather than critics.

In this case, however, Aaron explained to Moses that, since his two sons had died that day, it would be too hard for him to rise above the level of his own distresses, therefore he would not be in a fitting state of soul to rightly feel the failure of others. He asks then, would his eating of the sin offering outwardly be accepted in the sight of the Lord? In other words, he would be going through the form without any real heart in it. Moses recognized the force of this, and was content.

Leviticus 11

ANIMALS ALLOWED OR DISALLOWED FOR FOOD (vv. 1-8)

Never since the flood has man been commanded to be a vegetarian. After the flood Noah was told, “every moving thing that lives shall be food for you” (Gen. 9: 3). Nothing at that time was forbidden, except the eating of blood, a matter that has not changed through the ages. However, under law, and under law only, God put strict limits on what animals, birds or water creatures were permitted to Israel to eat. These laws were never put upon Gentiles, but only on Israel. The reason for some being forbidden was simply because of a spiritual significance, not that there was evil in the creature itself. This is clearly seen in Acts 10: 9-15 and Acts 10: 28. In a vision the Lord told Peter to eat all kinds of animals. Peter objected, but the Lord insisted. Then he realized that the unclean animals were symbolical of people, that is, Gentiles, as Peter says in Acts 10: 28, that God had shown him he should not call any man unclean. Before the cross, Israel was strictly separate from Gentiles because Gentiles were considered unclean to them, but the sacrifice of Christ cleanses all who trust Him as Savior, whether Jews or Gentiles, therefore God has removed the barrier between clean and unclean animals, so that “every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving” (1 Tim. 4: 4).

This chapter therefore deals typically with the question of our association with others in the world. The earlier chapters of Leviticus involve the beauty and holiness of our association with the living God.

Among the animals there were two marks that would make one suitable for eating, (1) if it has a divided hoof, and (2) if it chewed the cud (v. 3). The divided hoof enables the animal to walk through miry land without being bogged down in it. Thus our fellowship is not to be with those who are entangled in their walk by the affairs of this life, but with those who are dependent on divine grace to bear them through the world, for the number 2 (the divided hoof) speaks of dependence rather than self-sufficiency, as number 1 might infer.

Chewing the cud (rumination) is typical of the character of meditation, inferring taking time to digest the truth of the Word of God. As the hoofs indicate the walk through the world, so the chewing of the cud speaks of concern for God's honor.

Verses 4 to 8 insist that both of these things must be present or the animal was unclean. The camel chewed the cud but did not divide the hoof. So there are those who make a show of honoring God while their walk is fouled in the mire of the world. So-called “transcendental meditation” may give the appearance of being very spiritual, but it is total vanity, for there is no Christian walk to go with it. Again, falsely so-called “Christian Science” puts on an air of highest spirituality, but its victims live in a dream world, their feet unable to walk in the path of Christian faith. Many false religions are the same in essence, and the believer is to have no part with such things.

The swine however (v. 7) divides the hoof, but does not chew the cud. There are some people who seem to have ability to walk rightly, concentrating on moral uprightness and yet having no heart for learning the Word of God, no meditation therefore on the person of Christ who sits on the right hand of God. They may have feet that could take them through the mire of the world, but instead, though they may even be washed (not saved, but outwardly cleaned up), they prefer to return to wallowing in the mire (2 Peter 2: 22). Thus Mormonism makes a show of emphasizing morality, boasting in such things as not drinking tea or coffee, yet the Lord Jesus is not the Object of their thoughts and the mire of material gain has entangled them. The believer is warned not to have any fellowship with such.

WATER CREATURES ALLOWED OR DISALLOWED (vv. 9-12)

Verses 9 to 12 deal with creatures of the waters. Fish with fins and scales, whether from the rivers or the seas, were allowed in Israel's diet. They are in an element where progress is impeded, the water being much heavier than air. This would speak of the conflict of believers, having to expend energy in order to progress at all. For this conflict we need fins, the means of movement, which is virtually our offensive weapon, while the scales are for protection or defense. All true Christians are enlisted in God's army (2 Tim. 2: 3-4), therefore one who has no spiritual defense and no spiritual energy is not a fit companion for a believer. How can we have spiritual fellowship with one who has no spiritual qualities? These are in fact called an “abomination,” therefore to be repulsive to a believer.

 

BIRDS FORBIDDEN AS FOOD (vv. 13-19)

Birds are now considered, but only specific birds mentioned that were forbidden, with no rule given as to distinguishing clean from unclean. Yet all of these considered unclean are evidently those that feed on flesh or other animate life. These unclean birds of the air are typical of what is Satanic (Matt. 13: 4 and 19), for Satan is “the prince of the power of the air.” How many there are everywhere who follow Satan's example of consuming others rather than being of blessing to them. Such an unbeliever is referred to in 1 Corinthians 3: 17: “If any man destroy the temple of God, him shall God destroy.” In that chapter the believer is a builder, not a destroyer. Sometimes one can be so deceptive as to appear to be a believer in order to get in among God's people to destroy them. This is satanic deceit. We must therefore be on our guard not to have fellowship with what is unclean or questionable.

Clean birds were however not forbidden, for they speak of what is genuinely heavenly in character, such as is seen in Colossians 3: 2-3: “Set your mind on things above, not on things on the earth. For you have died and your life is hid with Christ in God.” Those who have this attitude are fit companions for believers. There are certain birds that in fact are typical of the Lord Jesus, being used in the offerings, as in Leviticus 1: 14-17, turtledoves or pigeons. Again, at the baptism of the Lord Jesus, we are told that “He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting upon Him” (Matt. 3: 16). This is a precious contrast to Genesis 15: 11, where the vultures came down on the carcasses of Abram's sacrifice with the object of devouring it, just as Satan tries to destroy the value of the sacrifice of Christ. Abram, the man of faith, drove the vultures away.

INSECTS TO BE PERMITTED OR REFUSED (vv. 20-23)

Flying creeping things symbolize those who profess what is heavenly, but compromise this with earthly-mindedness: their lives are therefore contradictory. Philippians 3: 18-19 tells us of these, the many who “walk,” that is, make a profession of heavenly character, but they really set their minds on earthly things. The believer is not to have fellowship with these. Yet if the flying insect had jointed legs with which to jump on the earth, this was permitted as food. For, though it had contact with the earth, it was enabled to leap above the earth's level, typifying the faith that rises above circumstances. Thus, locusts, crickets and grasshoppers might be eaten.

CONTACT WITH THE UNCLEAN DEFILING (vv. 24-28)

All those things that were unclean to Israel were not only forbidden to be eaten, but any person who had contact with the dead carcass of any of them was thereby himself rendered unclean. He must wash his clothes and be unclean until the evening. Again, it must be insisted that there was no moral uncleanness in the dead body itself, but it symbolized the uncleanness that believers today may contact by associating with what is morally or spiritually unclean. It is with very real reason that Timothy was instructed, “Do not lay hands on anyone hastily, nor share in other people's sins: keep yourself pure” (1 Tim. 5: 22). In disobeying this we might be virtually handling a dead carcass. The person may be guilty of serious sins we do not suspect, and by associating with him we should identify ourselves with his sins. In other words, we must take time to know a person before identifying ourselves with him.

If we have had such contact with uncleanness, whether or not unwillingly, there is to be true self-judgment of the matter, a washing of our clothes (our habits), and then restoration.

   

CREEPING THINGS (vv. 29-47)

Only some creeping things that are forbidden are mentioned here, yet in verses 41-43 this is widened to include all creeping things of whatever kind. These are typical of people who are of a repulsive earthbound character, and no doubt each one of them is intended to picture some special unfavorable characteristic of such unbelievers, though we may be unable to interpret the details of these things.

None of these were to be eaten, and if any had died, a person who even touched the dead body would be unclean until evening (v. 31). Or if such a dead body fell on any article of wood or clothing or skin or sack, or whatever was used to work with, the article was to be put in water and be unclean until evening, when it would again be clean (v. 32)

However, if the body fell into an earthen vessel, the vessel was to be broken and anything inside the vessel was unclean. In such a vessel any food that had been made wet with water or any liquid in the vessel would be unclean (v. 34). Even an oven or a cooking stove (likely made of earth) would be unclean through a dead carcass or part of it falling on it, and it was to be broken.

On the other hand, a spring that produced plenty of water would not be defiled by the dead carcass (v. 36). Typically this tells us that the word and Spirit of God are superior to death and cannot be defiled by it. For water speaks of the word of God and its flowing speaks of the energy of the Spirit of God in giving power to the word.

While generally otherwise anything that touched part of a dead carcass would be unclean, yet seed that was to be sown was an exception, so long as the seed was not moistened with water (vv. 37-38). The spiritual significance of this is perhaps hard to discern

Though not dealing with the same subject, verses 39 and 40 are inserted here concerning clean animals. If one of these were to die (not therefore slaughtered for meat), then a person who touched its carcass would be unclean until evening, or if one ate of its carcass, he must wash his clothes and be unclean until evening. Even what is clean may fall into the corruption of death.

But in verses 41-43 it is insisted that all creeping things were forbidden to Israel. Even these are no longer forbidden now that grace has been declared in Christ Jesus our Lord (1 Tim. 4: 4), at least if they are received with thanksgiving. This reminds us that even the most loathsome of human beings may still be saved by faith in the Lord Jesus.

These instructions were given to Israel on the basis of the holiness of their God (vv. 44-45). God's name is to be sanctified from all that is inconsistent with His character. Because He is holy, Israel was commanded to be holy. For God had brought them out from the unclean bondage of Egypt that they should belong to Him. They (and we) should therefore love what is good and abhor that which is evil.

Verses 46-47 conclude the treatment of this subject by declaring this to be the law given to distinguish between the unclean and the clean.

LAWS CONNECTED WITH CHILDBIRTH

Every child born into the world adds to the sin that was first introduced by the woman. Yet God had told Adam and Eve to “be fruitful and multiply” (Gen. 1: 28), and this instruction was not changed when they sinned, though God told the woman, “I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception; in pain you shall bring forth children” (Gen. 3: 16). But each child born is a reminder that sin requires a sacrifice. So in Israel when a woman had borne a male child, she was to be unclean for seven days. On the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin was to be circumcised. The number eight signifies a new beginning, which takes place when the flesh is cut off, for “the flesh profits nothing” (John 6: 63).

Then she was to remain 33 days “in the blood of her purification” (v. 4). She was not to touch anything that was consecrated to the service of God, nor enter the sanctuary, until her purification was complete. But if she should bear a female child, the time was twice as long, two weeks being unclean and 66 days of waiting until purification was accomplished. This stems from the fact that “Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived fell into transgression” (1 Tim. 2: 14), and it is through the woman that the race of sinners is perpetuated.

In each case, however, when the time was completed, whether for a male or female, the mother was to bring to the priest a lamb of the first year as a burnt offering and a young pigeon or turtledove as a sin offering (v. 6). Notice here that there was no trespass offering, for it was not a matter of her having done anything wrong. But the sin offering deals with the sinful nature that is inherited by birth, so that this offering speaks of God having, by the cross of Christ, condemned sin in the flesh (Rom. 8:3). The burnt offering tells us that God's glory is really the first consideration in this matter. When God is glorified and sin condemned, then the unclean is rendered clean (v. 7).

However, a provision of grace was made for one who was poor (v. 8). If she could not bring a lamb, then another young pigeon or turtledove would substitute for the lamb. Joseph and Mary took advantage of this provision for poverty, when presenting the Lord Jesus to God in the temple (Luke 2: 22-24).

   

Leviticus 13

 LAWS CONCERNING LEPROSY (vv. 1-44)

The seriousness of the plague of leprosy is emphasized by the fact that two long chapters are devoted to this subject. The physical illness, however, is significant of that which is far more serious spiritually. In Chapter 12 have seen the sinful nature of mankind dealt with; now this chapter considers that which speaks of the outbreak of the nature in sinful activity. For, though we are not responsible for having a sinful nature, yet we are responsible if we allow it to break out in sinful actions, and today those who form an assembly are responsible to discern and judge evil when it does break out among them.

When something of a questionable character appeared on a person's skin, then he was to be brought to a priest, who was to examine it, for he might not come voluntarily. All the congregation could not examine him, but a fit representative of the congregation was to do so. Thus, in the assembly, though all believers are priests, yet it would be only those in whom priestly character is developed who are able to rightly discern and judge as to the seriousness of any suspected evil. Those who investigate such things should be those who have godly discernment and experience, and who know how to “have compassion on those who are ignorant and going astray” (Heb. 5: 2)

If something appeared on the skin of an individual that turned into a sore similar to leprosy, then a priest was to examine him. If two symptoms were evident, the hair in the sore turned white and the sore deeper than the skin, then no question remained: it was leprosy, and the priest was to pronounce the patient unclean. The white hair would speak of the decay of spiritual strength and the sore deeper than the skin indicates that the sin is not merely a light case of indiscretion. To discern this requires true spiritual perception, and great care must be taken that any judgment should be under the guidance of God. But when the case is clear, then God's word is clear: the person must be pronounced unclean.

On the other hand, though a bright spot may be white, it if did not appear to be deeper than the skin and its hair had not turned white, the priest's judgment must be delayed. The person was to be isolated for seven days. This would not speak of one being put out of fellowship, but only of his being deprived of certain privileges of practical fellowship for the time being until the matter was cleared. If no change had taken place after seven days, then anothe