After the tabernacle has been described,
and the chief articles of furniture specified, we are permitted to learn
something concerning the high priest’s ministry by a lengthy description of his
garments.
Called
of God, as
was Aaron.
No child of God to-day is a priest,
neither is his ministry priestly, nevertheless it is well to remember that God
reserves the right to call and to choose as well as to fit those who are to be
His ministers. While this may not be so
obvious to-day, it is not the less real, and if we could see as God sees, there
may still be much strange fire offered in His service. Have we not met a brother obviously unfitted
for speaking in public, but eminently fitted for some other sphere of God’s
service, spoiling both his own witness and hindering that of others by failure to
keep in mind the Scriptures: “To every
man his work”, and “Every man according to his several ability”? This feature is stressed in connection with
the appointment of the priesthood of Israel:
“And no man taketh this
honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron” (Heb. v. 4).
“Take thou unto thee Aaron
thy brother, and his sons with him, from among the children of Israel, that he
may minister unto Me in the priest's office, even Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar, Aaron's sons”
(Exod. xxviii. 1).
Two aspects of the high priest’s work are
discovered by comparing:
(1) “That he may minister UNTO ME” (Exod. xxviii. 1).
(2) “For every high priest taken from among men, is ordained FOR MEN
in things pertaining TO GOD” (Heb. v. 1).
The claims of both God and man were met in
the ministry of the high priest. Hence
in Hebrews we have Christ presented not only as high priest, but also as
mediator: not only meeting all the
claims of God, but ever living to make intercession for His people.
As we read the names Nadab and Abihu, we
call to mind their transgression and their solemn end. From one point of view their action was but
the repetition of the high priest’s ministry, but from another point of view it
was a willful intrusion and disobedience.
In Exodus xxiv.
these two sons of Aaron had been initiated into something of the
awfulness of “worship”, and had seen the glory of the Lord as a “devouring
fire” (xxiv. 17). In Lev. ix. 24
we read: “And there came fire out
from before the Lord, and consumed (devoured, same word) upon the altar the
burnt offering”. Yet in spite of this
reminder of the “devouring fire” (of Exodus xxiv.), Lev. x. 1, 2
opens with the account of the offering of Nadab and Abihu of strange
fire, “which the Lord commanded them not”, with the awful result: “And there went out fire from the Lord and devoured them, and they died before the
Lord”.
The strangeness of the fire consisted
simply in the fact that Nadab and Abihu had never been called of God nor
commanded of God to this service. Is
there not a need for every one of us to put up the apostle’s prayer: “Lord, what wilt Thou have me do?”.
Holiness, glory
and beauty.
The garments that are described in Exodus xxviii. are called “holy garments”, and were “for
glory and beauty”. Holiness opens and
closes this description, for the gold plate on the mitre described in xxviii. 36 bore the legend “Holiness to the Lord”. Holiness, sanctification and cognate words
enter largely into N.T. doctrine, so that it will be for our edification to
obtain some idea of the basic meaning of this word. The root idea of kodesh (“holy”) is “separated or set apart”, and while holiness
cannot be thought of apart from the highest moral and spiritual qualities, it
is nevertheless a fact that such qualities are not inherent in the original
conception. Leviticus xx. 24-26 will bring out this basic idea of separation
fairly clearly:
“I am the LORD your God, which have
separated you from other
people … ye shall put a difference
between clean beasts and unclean … ye shall
be holy unto Me, for I the LORD am
holy, and have severed you from other people, that ye should be
Mine.”
Again in
Deut. xix. 2 & 7 we
read: “Thou shalt separate three cities”; and
in Joshua xx. 7 this command is obeyed: “and they sanctified (margin) these cities”. Jeremiah xvii. 22 speaks of “hallowing” the Sabbath day, that
is separating it from the rest of the week, setting it apart for God’s
service. The same word is used in Jer. xxii. 7
for “preparing” destroyers, the idea of separation being constant, but
the N.T. conception of sanctification is entirely absent from the passage. Yet once more. When Paul said in Gal. i. 15 that he had been “separated” from his mother’s
womb, he was making an evident allusion to that other prophet of the nations,
Jeremiah, who had been “sanctified” from the womb (Jer. i. 5). To make the matter certain we must record the
awful fact that such unholy creatures as Sodomites are nevertheless called qadesh, simply because they were “set
apart”, but surely not “sanctified”, to the abominable service of Canaanitish
gods (I Kings xiv. 24; II Kings xxiii. 7; Hos.iv.14, “separate”; Job xxxvi. 14, “unclean”). We
must therefore always allow in our interpretations of saintship and
sanctification this element of separation unto God. With this in mind II.Cor.vi.14-17 (with its insistence upon “being separate” as
well as not touching the unclean thing) may be remembered as “perfecting holiness in the fear of God”
(II Cor. vii. 1).
The holy garments were “for glory and
beauty”. We call to mind such passages
as “the beauty of holiness” and the like, but the connection with the N.T. is
of greater importance just now. The LXX
translates this phrase by timē kai doxa,
“honour and glory”, and Heb. ii. 9 &
II Pet. i. 17 are seen to be
antitypical. Peter’s reference is to the
mount of transfiguration, where Christ the King is seen as Christ the High
Priest. This is important. We hear much of the fact that Matthew is the
Gospel of the Kingdom, but we do well to remember that it will be a kingdom of
priests (Rev. i. 6) when it is established, and that Christ is the
Priest-King. We have given elsewhere the
structure of Matthew’s Gospel, and have shown the twofold character of its
teaching — we will just revive the memory so far as to draw attention to the
two time divisions, viz., Matt. iv.
17 &
xvi. 21, and the two occasions
when the voice from heaven testified:
“This is My beloved Son, in Whom I am well pleased” (Matt. iii. 17; xvii. 5).
It is in the second, the priestly section, that the Lord first speaks of
His suffering and death. Uzziah was
stricken with leprosy for daring to unite the office of king and priest, there
being but one Priest after the order of Melchisedec, even the Lord Jesus
Christ.
There are six items of clothing specified
in Exod. xxviii. 4, to which may be added the “bonnets” and
“breeches” of verses 40 & 42, making eight items in all. Some of these garments need no special
comment: those that seem to call for
exposition are the ephod, with its
shoulder stones and breastplate, and the robe
with its bells and pomegranates.
THE
EPHOD. — The word is taken unaltered from the Hebrew, and comes from aphad, “to bind”, being found in Exod. xxix. 5
where “gird” is aphad. The ephod seems to have been made of two
pieces, back and front, and its chief use was to provide a beautiful and
efficient holder for the breastplate.
Scripture records that Aaron the high
priest, Samuel the prophet (I
Sam. ii. 18), and David the king (II
Sam. vi. 14) wore the ephod, prophetically setting forth the fulness of Christ
as Prophet, Priest and King, Who shall rule and reign in the coming
kingdom. The wearing of the ephod, one
of the garments of “glory and beauty” or “honour and glory”, gives point to the
words of I Sam. ii. 28-30:
“Did I choose him out of all
the tribes of Israel to be My
priest … to wear an ephod before Me … Be it far from Me, for them that honour
Me I will honour, and they that despise Me shall be lightly esteemed.”
Two ounces of gold, each set with an onyx
stone, and engraved with the names of the children of Israel according to their
birth, were placed upon the shoulders of the ephod, that Aaron should bear
their names before the Lord upon his two shoulders for a memorial. This was one memorial ever associated with
the ephod. The other was connected with
the breastplate. This set apart a
special stone for each tribe, and Aaron bore them upon his heart for a memorial
before the Lord continually when he went in unto the holy place. Upon his shoulders, upon his heart: surely no words of ours are needed in
explanation of this beautiful symbol of an equally blessed fact.
URIM
AND THUMMIM. — A marvellous
amount of ingenuity has been expended in an attempt to explain how the Urim and
Thummim gave the Lord’s answer, or “judgment”.
Perhaps the one most satisfactory is that given in The Companion Bible margin.
The note, however, is too long to transcribe here. It suggests that the breastplate being
“doubled” (Exod. xxviii. 16), was a bag in which the Urim and Thummim were
placed, and that Prov. xvi. 33 makes reference to it, the “lap” being the
“bosom” and referring to the breastplate.
The two Hebrew words Urim and Thummim mean Lights and Perfections, and
while we may not know exactly how the answers were given or how these titles
are appropriate, it suffices that it was efficient, while the LXX translation
“Manifestation and Truth” points us on to the Holy Scriptures, the Divine
Oracles, where we too may obtain infallible guidance. If we could only and
ever keep in mind the close association that this makes between the High Priest
and the Scriptures, every study would become a sanctuary, the spirit would
rejoice as the understanding was illuminated, worship and work, grammar and
grace, glossaries and glory would be blessedly intermingled, and the lexicon
and concordance would be but rungs in the ladder that lead from earth to
heaven, to the right hand of the Majesty on high.
THE
ROBE OF THE
EPHOD. — The robe of the ephod was “all of blue”, the colour of heaven,
and the sign of separation and holiness (Numb. xv. 38). This robe was made of one piece, and the hole
through which the head came, presumably, was bound with woven work “that it be
not rent” (Exod.xxviii.32). Psalm
xxii. says: “They cast lots upon My vesture” (18). This was fulfilled at the foot of the
cross. The coat that belonged to the
Saviour was without a seam, woven from the top throughout; they said therefore, “Let us not rend it, but
cast lots for it” (John xix. 23, 24), and there can be little doubt that here
was an indication of the High Priest, Prophet, and King Who was at that moment
offering the one great sacrifice for sin.
Beneath the hem or skirt of the blue robe
was arranged a decoration consisting of pomegranates in blue, purple and
scarlet, and golden bells. These were to
be worn by Aaron when he went into the holy place and when he came out: “His sound shall be heard … that he die
not”. This is the first of a series of
most solemn injunctions connected with priestly service. We read that the priestly garments must be
worn by Aaron and his sons, “that they bear not iniquity and die” (Exod.
xxviii. 43); that hands and feet must be
washed; that wine must be avoided; that Aaron was not to come within the veil at
all times, and that when he did come he must carry incense with him; that the priest must be kept scrupulously
free from uncleanness, and that the Kohathites must not see the holy thing when
they are covered, all these injunctions being followed by the word, “that he
die not” or “lest he die”. It is sometimes said that these golden bells were a means
of assuring Israel of the active ministry of the high priest when he went
within the veil once a year on the day of atonement. This cannot be, for the simple reason that
a different set of linen clothes was worn on that occasion. No, the bells and pomegranates were not
"lest they fear", but “lest he die”;
such is the absolute need of all the acceptableness set forth by the
symbols of fruitfulness and pleasant sound.
Golden bells and pomegranates, lest he
die! As we weigh over these things, may
we realize more fully than ever the awfulness of approach unto the living God,
and while rejoicing in an access that is with “boldness and confidence”, let us
never forget that we have this boldness and access with confidence “by the faith of Him”. The fulness of our acceptance, the freeness
of grace, and the glorious liberty of our calling should never, surely, be
abused or minimize the infinite preciousness of the blood that has been shed,
and the tremendous responsibility shouldered on our behalf by our glorious
Head, the Lord Jesus Christ.
No comments:
Post a Comment