Having considered something of the rich
teaching set forth by the ark of the covenant, and the mercy seat within the
second veil, we now, following the order of the narrative before us, pass into
the holy place and turn our attention to the furniture there.
Divine
service.
Before passing on to detailed
descriptions, however, we must have some idea of the typical meaning of the
“holy place” in which this furniture stood:--
“There was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick,
and the table, and the shewbread; which
is called the sanctuary (margin, the holy, Gr. hagia). And after the second veil, the tabernacle
which is called the Holiest of all (Gr. hagia hagion)” (Heb. ix. 2, 3).
Here we have very clearly the subdivision
set forth with the distinctive names of the two parts, the division being made
by the second veil:--
“Now when these things were thus ordained,
the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of
God. But into the second went the
high priest alone once every year, not without blood” (Heb. ix. 6, 7).
Without seeking to force a distinction
beyond its limits, it appears from the usage of the words “service” and “serve”
that these do not so much describe the great atoning work of Christ, as that
they refer to the worship and service of the redeemed. Both the Saviour and the saved were set forth
in type in the tabernacle. The Saviour
being typified by the solitary act of the high priest “alone once”, the saved
being typified by the priests who went “always” accomplishing the
“service”. Latreia (service)
occurs in Heb. ix. 1 & 6, latreuo (to serve or worship), in Heb. viii. 5;
ix. 9, 14; x. 2; xii. 28;
xiii. 10. It will be seen that the “service” is entirely
connected with the Levitical priesthood, or its N.T. counterpart. They that did the service were not perfected
as pertaining to the conscience by the daily ritual then imposed (Heb. ix.
9). It necessitated a greater high priest
than Aaron, and a better sacrifice than was offered on the day of atonement to
purge the conscience from dead works to serve the living God (Heb. ix.
14). The shadows of the law with its
typical sacrifices could not make the comers thereunto perfect, for their
consciences were not really purged from sin (Heb. x. 1, 2). The gifts and sacrifices that constituted the
service of the typical tabernacle “stood only in meats and drinks, and divers
baptisms, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation”
(Heb. ix. 10).
Latreuo and latreia, are not
found in the Septuagint of Genesis, they appear for the first time in
Exodus. The Passover feast is called
“this service” (Exod.xii.25,26).
Pharaoh understood “service” to involve the offering of sacrifice, for
in Exod. iii. 12; iv. 23; vii. 16;
viii. 1 & 20 the demand had
been made that Israel should be liberated to “serve” God, Pharaoh’s words are,
“go ye, sacrifice to your God in the land” (Exod. viii. 25). Moses, moreover, when speaking once again to
Pharaoh, uses another expression of similar import. To Pharaoh’s “go, serve the Lord”, Moses
replies, “We must hold a feast unto the Lord” (Exod. x. 8, 9).
While latreuo seems to have special
reference to “the service of a worshipper”, and is omitted from Genesis, douleuo
is of frequent occurrence in that book.
It is used of the service rendered of kings (Gen. xiv. 4); of Israel’s bondage (xv. 14); of the elder serving the younger (xxv. 23); of men serving man (xxvii.29,40); and of Jacob’s service to Laban (xxix. 15, 18, 20, 25, 30; xxx. 26, 29; xxxi. 6, 41).
The apostle uses the two words
in Romans i.:--
“Paul, a bond slave (doulos) of
Jesus Christ” (Rom. i. 1).
“Whom I serve (latreuo) with my
spirit in the gospel” (Rom. i. 9).
“Who worshipped and served (latreuo)
the creature” (i. 25).
If the distinct aspects of service that
these two words indicate are kept in mind, the meaning of the apostle will
become more clear. Coming now to Exodus xxv.
we bring with us the thought that here in the first tabernacle, where
priests ministered daily, we are dealing with service, and it is in
connection with service that we must view the table of shewbread.
Divine
sustenance.
The table not only held the twelve loaves
of shewbread, but also was laid with “dishes, spoons, covers, and bowls of pure
gold”. It was a table, not an altar, a
table spread in the presence of the Lord with food wherewith those who rendered
service might be fed. The margin of Exod. xxv. 29
renders “to cover withal” by “to pour out withal”, and the LXX reads:--
“And thou shalt make its dishes and its
censers, and its bowls and its cups, with which thou shalt offer drink
offerings; of pure gold shalt thou
make them” (Exodus xxv. 29).
This makes us think of the supreme act of
service contemplated by the apostle Paul in
Phil. ii. 17, and carried through
in II Tim. iv. 6, where we have the only occurrence of spendomai
in the N.T. He was willing to be poured out as a drink
offering upon the sacrifice and service of faith. While therefore the bread is the important
item on the table, the drink offering must be remembered. The ingredients and the quantity for the
making of the twelve loaves were not left to human judgment, they are given
in Lev. xxiv. 5-9:
“And thou shalt take fine flour, and bake twelve cakes
thereof: two tenth deals shall be in one
cake. And thou shalt set them in two
rows, six on a row, upon the pure table before the LORD. And thou shalt put pure frankincense upon each
row, that it may be on the bread for a memorial, even an offering made
by fire unto the LORD. Every sabbath he
shall set it in order before the LORD continually, being taken from the
children of Israel by an everlasting covenant. And it shall be Aaron's and his sons'; and they shall eat it in the holy place …”
(Lev. xxiv. 5-9).
It will be noticed that no leaven enters
into the composition of these twelve loaves;
leaven being a type of evil, therefore whatever or whoever is
represented by these loaves is viewed as perfect. Moreover, upon each row is place
frankincense, which would impart a sweet smelling savour.
The words “taken from the children of
Israel” have been variously interpreted.
Spurrell suggests "a presentation from". The R.V. reads “on behalf of”, which is quite
an opposite idea. The Hebrew
"M" which is frequently translated “from” does sometimes carry the
thought suggested by the R.V. For
example, Gen. v. 29, “because of”;
Exod. ii. 23, “by reason
of”; Isa. xxviii. 7, “through”.
Though taken from the children of Israel, it was also a memorial before the
Lord on the behalf of the children of Israel.
These loaves were eaten by the priests in
the holy place. There are several things
specified as eaten by the priests in the holy place, among which we find the
flesh of the sin offering (Lev. vi. 26);
the flesh of the trespass offering (vii.6); the peace offering (vii. 14); and the shewbread (xxiv. 9).
The
memorial.
The twelve loaves of shewbread are not
said to be a memorial, much as we may have expected it; the pure frankincense upon each row
constitutes the memorial. It will be
helpful if we seek a clearer understanding of this term, Azkarah. This feminine form
of the word occurs seven times in Scripture.
The passages are Lev. ii. 2, 9, 16; v. 12;
vi. 15; xxiv. 7 and
Numb. v. 26. Zikkaron,
the masculine form, occurs twenty-four times.
We give a selection only. We use
the word “reminder” as variant, as familiarity with the A.V. sometimes blunts
our senses: “This day shall be unto you
for a reminder” (Exod. xii. 14).
“It shall be for a sign … and a reminder” (Exod. xiii. 9). These two passages refer to the feast of the
Passover and the unleavened bread: “Stones for a reminder unto the children of
Israel … their names before the Lord … as a reminder” (Exod. xxviii. 12,
29). Here the names of Israel engraven
upon the stones of the ephod and breastplate are a reminder both to Israel and
to the Lord. We cannot give all occurrences,
they can easily be found. Zikkaron is
used seven times in blessing, and once in judgment against Amalek in
Exodus. Zeker, another masculine
form, occurs several times. The first
occurrence is Exod. iii. 15, “This is My name for the age, and this is My reminder
unto all generations”.
The Passover was a reminder of redemption,
the unleavened bread of the bondage endured and the exodus effected, together
with the need to “purge out the old leaven of wickedness”. The name “Jehovah Elohim of your fathers” was
a sufficient reminder for God to “remember His covenant” (Leviticus xxvi. 42,
45). The frankincense upon the twelve
loaves was a reminder. A reminder
of what? Before we can answer that
question we must answer another: “What did the twelve loaves typify?”
The bread of
the presence.
It is good to see in books dealing with
the tabernacle and its typical teaching that every opportunity is seized to bring forward the fulness of
Christ, but there may be even in this, zeal without knowledge. We refer to the interpretation that speaks of
the twelve loaves as typical of Christ as “the bread of life”. In John vi.
the Lord says, “Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness and are
dead ... I am the living bread” (John vi. 49, 51). It will be seen that lying upon the ground
outside the tabernacle morning by morning was to be found the type of Christ as
the bread of life. That therefore can
scarcely be the meaning of these twelve loaves also. This “bread of presence” before the Lord
“always” (Exod.xxv.30), the “continual bread” (Numb. iv. 7), like the names
engraved upon the stones of the ephod and the stones of the breastplate,
represented the twelve tribes of Israel.
The table of shewbread is mentioned
in II Chron. iv. 19 under Solomon, and again in xiii. 11
it is mentioned in king Abijah’s appeal to the ten tribes when he
pleaded for the true unity of Israel, also in Hezekiah’s reign (II Chron. xxix.
18). When the captivity returned under
Nehemiah, even though called by their enemies “these feeble Jews” (Neh. iv. 2),
and even though the restored temple was in the eyes of those who knew the
Lord’s house in its first glory “as nothing” (Hag. ii. 3), there is not the
remotest suggestion either by Abijah, Hezekiah, or Nehemiah that any number of
loaves than twelve should be used, or that the frankincense should be
omitted. The twelve loaves set forth
Israel as viewed in Christ, not as viewed in themselves. “He hath not beheld iniquity in Jacob,
neither hath He seen perverseness in Israel” (Numb. xxiii. 21). This was no “legal fiction”, but based upon
the offering of their Messiah:--
“Whom God hath set forth to be a
propitiation through faith in His blood, to declare His righteousness for the
remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God” (Rom. iii.
25).
Whatever the personal state of Israel may
have been whether united as one nation or divided into two, whether humbly
seeking God or wickedly departing from His commandment, one thing remained
“always” and “continual”. That was the
“everlasting covenant” or the “covenant of the ages”. This it will be remembered is connected with
the command concerning the shewbread in
Lev.xxiv.5-9. Just as the memorial in the offering for
jealousy was to bring “iniquity to remembrance” (Numb. v. 15), so the memorial
upon the shewbread was to bring the sweet savour of Christ to remembrance.
The
age-abiding covenant.
The first mention of berith olam,
“an age-abiding covenant”, is in Gen.ix.16, where God sets His bow in the
cloud as a “reminder” (“that I may remember”) of His covenant with all
flesh. Now this covenant was made notwithstanding
the fact that “the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth” (Gen.
viii. 21), and in close association with the “sweet savour of rest” that
spoke of the offering of Christ. So with
Israel. Abram’s name was changed to
Abraham, and the Lord said:--
“I will establish My covenant between Me
and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an age-abiding
covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land of thy sojournings, all the land of
Canaan, for an age-abiding possession;
and I will be their God” (Gen. xvii. 7, 8).
Though Israel broke this age-abiding
covenant (Isa. xxiv. 5), yet in the person of their Messiah that covenant is
established (Isa. lv. 3 &
lxi. 8). This age-abiding covenant lies behind the new
covenant which was sealed by the blood of Christ (Jer. xxxii. 40 &
xxxi 31-37). Perhaps there is no more marvellous setting
for this covenant, nor a passage that emphasizes its utter independence of
human merit than Ezek. xvi. 60. Charges
are made against Israel in Ezekiel
xvi. that reveal a condition that dwarfs
the sin of Sodom “as a very little thing” (xvi. 47), and by comparison can
justify the words “they (Sodom and Samaria) are more righteous than thou” (xvi.
52). Then come the words of verse 60:--
“Nevertheless I will remember My covenant
with thee in the days of thy youth, and I will establish with thee an
age-abiding covenant.”
All this is set forth in the table of
shewbread. Twelve loaves show Israel
complete and undivided before the Lord.
These twelve loaves are all unleavened, Israel’s righteousness is fully
provided for in Jehovah Tsidkenu.
“Pure” frankincense above, and a “pure” table beneath, indicate their
perfect acceptance in the Beloved. Here
is a “reminder” of that “age-abiding covenant” that glorifies the end of Ezekiel xvi.,
and will glorify the end of this stiff-necked and gain-saying people.
The
shewbread and service.
Returning to our opening thoughts we can
see the relation between this tremendous fact of Israel’s position before the
Lord, and the strength such a recognition would afford to all who truly
appreciated it, who in type eat that bread in the holy place. Is there no word for the members of the one
body? The dispensation of the mystery may
not appear in type or symbol in the O.T., yet parallel principles are everywhere
discoverable. May we not substitute “chosen
in Him before the overthrow of the world” for Israel’s “age-abiding
covenant”? May we not see the
frankincense in the purpose “holy and without blemish”? May we not see in the risen and ascended
Christ “far above all” the pledge that we too are “blessed with all spiritual
blessings in Christ”? However broken and
divided the church may appear to the human eye, we too may contemplate by the
eye of faith, as in the presence of God, the “one body” (Eph.iv.4), and
comprehend with “all saints” the love of Christ. Our inheritance is as inviolable as that of
Israel, and we too have as the ground and base of this perfect presentation (Eph.
v. 27) the “offering and sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling savour” (Eph. v.
2). For us no type or symbol is
necessary. “The bread of presence” is
expressed for the church once and for ever in the blessed words, “Accepted in
the Beloved” (Eph. i. 6), and “Made meet” (Col. i. 12).
No comments:
Post a Comment