We have seen the emphasis which the close
association of the unleavened bread with the Passover lamb gives to the fact
that redemption must always be manifested by separation from evil: that those who are “called saints” should act
as “becometh saints”; that those who are
“unleavened” should put away the “leaven of malice and wickedness”. This is the ideal, and nothing lower than
this can have the sanction of the Word.
The Scripture, however, reveals the fact which everywhere presses upon
us today, that the meaning and truth of the unleavened bread is not practically
realized.
“And the children of Israel journeyed from
Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside
children. And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle”
(Exod. xii. 37, 38).
When Moses stood before Pharaoh he
demanded that not only should the men go, but said he:--
“We will go with our young and with our
old, with our sons and with our daughters, with our flocks and with our herds
we will go” (x. 9).
When the exodus actually took place it is
found that in between the “men and the children” and their “flocks and herds”,
is “a mixed multitude also”, or as the margin reads “a great mixture”. The effect of this mixture is seen in Numb.xi.4:
“And the mixt multitude that was among them fell a-lusting”: that is what we might expect. There is however a sad echo of the “also”
of Exod. xii. 38, for
Numb. xi. 4 continues:--
“And the children of Israel also wept
again, and said, Who shall give us flesh to eat? . . . . . there is nothing at
all, beside this manna before our eyes.”
“This manna” is elsewhere called “angel’s
food”, “bread from heaven”, and is type of Him Who is the bread of life that
came down from heaven. The influence of
the mixed multitude is clearly seen. The
heart is turned back to Egypt, and the things of God are lightly esteemed.
Some of this mixed multitude were allied
to Israel by marriage. This is no fancy,
for we have at least one such alliance and its disastrous effect recorded
in Lev. xxiv. 10:--
“And the son of an Israelitish woman, whose father was an Egyptian, went out
among the children of Israel.”
The words “went out among” seem to imply
some definite purpose. We are told
in Exod. ii. 11 that when Moses was grown:--
“He went out unto his brethren … and he spied an Egyptian smiting an
Hebrew.”
Here, however, we find, “The son of the
Israelitish woman and a man of Israel strove together in the camp”. To the fleshly lusts of Numbers xi.
therefore must be added the “strife” of
Leviticus xxiv. Not only so, but the dreadful sin of blasphemy
must be included:--
“And the Israelitish woman’s
son blasphemed the name of the Lord, and cursed.”
Instead of loving that name, and revering
it, this son of an Israelitish woman blasphemed, and blasphemy is the germ of
Antichrist.
Nehemiah xiii. 1-3 shows how Israel, when returned from the
captivity, mingled with the Ammonite and the Moabite, and these
are called “the
mixed multitude”. In
Neh. xiii. 23, 24 Ashdod, Moab
and Ammon are cited as nations which had intermarried with Israel, and Nehemiah
draws a sad lesson from Solomon:--
“Did not Solomon king of Israel sin by
these things? Yet among many nations was
there no king like him, who was beloved of his God, and God made him king over
all Israel, nevertheless even him did outlandish women cause to sin” (Nehemiah
xiii. 26).
Ezra ix. 1, 2 likewise mourns over the fact that Israel had
not:--
“separated themselves from
the people of the lands . . . . . the holy seed have mingled themselves with
the people of those lands.”
Jehoshaphat was another king who had a
good record, for he “walked in the first ways of his father David, and sought
not unto Baalim, but sought the Lord God of his father”. In the third year of his reign he sent
Princes and Levites with the book of the law of the Lord to teach in
Judah. Yet like Solomon and like Israel
of the exodus he failed, for II Chron.
xviii. 1 says:--
“Now Jehoshaphat had riches and honour in
abundance, and joined affinity with Ahab”,
and
that “affinity” was his ruin. It is
interesting to note that chatan, “to
join in affinity”, is translated “to be a son-in-law”, “to make marriages”,
“father-in-law”, and “mother-in-law”, showing the closeness of the union
between Jehoshaphat and Ahab.
Returning to Israel and the mixed
multitude we see the failure to put into practice
the truth contained in the type of the unleavened bread.
The Corinthians, we have seen, were
“called saints”, and Christ had been made to them “sanctification” as well as
“redemption”. They were “unleavened” in
Christ, but they had failed to realize their position.
II Corinthian vii. 1, summing up the argument of II Cor. vi. 14-18 where the unequal yoke and unholy fellowship
is seen in all its ugliness, says:--
“Let us cleanse ourselves from all
filthiness of the flesh and spirit, PERFECTING holiness in the fear of God.”
Holiness we can neither make nor merit,
but when the grace of God separates us, by the blood of Christ (as of a lamb
without blemish and without spot) from sin and death with its bondage and its
bitterness that are worse than those of Egypt, then “our reasonable service”
must include this heart and life separation, the absence of which worked such
disaster in the spiritual experience of Israel, of Solomon, of Jehoshaphat and
of the Corinthians. This is “perfecting
holiness”.
“Wherefore come out from among them, and
be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, and will be a Father
unto you, and ye shall be My sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty” (II.Cor.vi.17).
No comments:
Post a Comment