Leviticus

Leviticus 23:4-8
The Feasts of the Lord
Passover & Unleavened Bread

With the weekly Sabbath explained last week, today we begin the annual feasts of the Lord. The first two of them, Passover and Unleavened Bread, have already been explained rather thoroughly in past Exodus sermons. However, the Lord is restating them now as Feasts of the Lord because He wanted Israel to carefully observe them, each year, at set times.

They were to be annual pictures of Christ to come. If they paid attention to the symbolism of the Bible, and grasped what various things picture, they would then be able to more readily understand the evident nature of Christ’s fulfillment of each of them. They would also then know what was expected of them after He completed His work.

Unfortunately, Israel as a whole missed it. A certain portion of them got it, but the vast majority didn’t. For the most part, even Christians don’t really get it either. There are a lot more people in today’s world than in years past who are going back and looking more carefully at the Old Testament and seeing how it points to Christ. This is a good thing.

And yet at the same time, there are a lot of supposed Christians who are not only going back and looking at the Old Testament, they are unfortunately sticking to it as a means to an end. Instead of looking at how it points to Christ, they have taken and started applying these things to themselves.

It has become a viral infection within the church. Instead of seeing the annual feasts of the Lord as remarkable markers of Israel’s history which were to lead them to recognize their Messiah when He came, they instead find them to be observances which will hopefully lead them to a closer relationship with the Lord of the Old Testament. As wacky as that sounds, that is what is going on. It happened to me this week after giving the Sabbath sermon. Emails came flooding in, mis-citing and abusing Scripture, in order to show we are still under the law (Matthew 5:17-20).

People need to realize that the Lord, Yehovah of the Old is the Lord, Jesus of the New. These annual feasts were given to show us what He would do for us, and thus how we were to then live for Him. They are mere shadows of spiritual truths which pointed to the reality found in Christ Jesus.

Text Verse:  “So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, ¹⁷ which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ.” Colossians 2:16, 17

The substance is of Christ. The feasts of Israel were shadows, not reality. In Christ we have the substance, and in Christ we are to dwell. The tragedy of law-observance in today’s world is all the more heartbreaking when one considers that all it takes is a minor amount of study to realize that Christ is the end of these things; He is the fulfillment of them.

If I were to take you outside and offer you a table full of gold and other riches, or let you take the shadow in its place, which would you go for? The fool would go for the shadow, and he would end up with nothing. One cannot take a shadow. In the end, he is left completely empty handed.

On the other hand, the wise person, (which I know you all fit that category), would take the table full of riches. And guess what! In taking the substance, you get the shadow too. You get it all. But please, leave me the table, that was not a part of my offer to you. Go buy your own table with all that gold.

All kidding aside, the person who is caught up in law observance is the fool who gets nothing. Even the shadow he thinks he possesses will be taken from him.

For the truly wise person, grab the substance! Take hold of Christ Jesus, and rejoice in His work, accomplished for us, and then live for Him as you are shown how to do. It’s all to be found in His superior word. And so let’s turn to that precious word once again and… May God speak to us through His word today and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. The Passover (verses 4 & 5)

⁴ ‘These are the feasts of the Lord, holy convocations

Although not word for word, this is practically a repeat of verse 2. There the Lord said, “The feasts of the Lord, which you shall proclaim to be holy convocations, these are My feasts.” Because this is now repeated, it is generally assumed by some that the Sabbath isn’t actually a feast of the Lord. This is incorrect. It is a feast of the Lord, one which is weekly in nature. These are annual, and are thus set apart from the weekly Sabbath.

Further, by designating the Sabbath first and separately, the intent was to ensure that an annual feast was not to override, or nullify, the weekly Sabbath. They were to be held concurrently if they fell to the same day, but the Sabbath requirement was not to be ignored. With that understanding, the repetition concerning the feasts of the Lord now is given to enumerate the annual feasts in their order.

Although a bit confusing, the calendar to be used is the Redemption Calendar mandated by the Lord in Exodus 12. Until that time, the beginning of the annual calendar was in the seventh month, originally known in Hebrew as Ethanim, a word meaning something like “permanent flowings.”

After the Babylonian exile, the name of the month took on the Aramaic name of Tishri. This word, Tishri, comes from an Akkadian word, tasritu, meaning “beginning.” This could rightly be called the Creation Calendar as it was used since the time of creation. However, Tishri would become the seventh month in the newly established Redemption Calendar. This Redemption Calendar was first mandated in the Book of Redemption, Exodus. There in Exodus 12 it says –

“Now the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt, saying, ^2 ‘This month shall be your beginning of months; it shall be the first month of the year to you.’” Exodus 12:1, 2

The name of this newly established first month was Aviv, meaning ear, especially green ears of grain. Later, after the Babylonian exile, the name of the month would be changed to the Aramaic name, Nisan. In Assyrian, the word means “beginning.” Thus it is a new beginning after the first. The calendar change itself is giving us insights into God’s new beginnings in Christ.

This pattern of creation followed by redemption is seen throughout the Bible. It is seen in the calendars used. Also, in the giving of the Ten Commandments, they were relayed to the people first based on creation in the Decalogue of Exodus 20. However, it is based on redemption in the Decalogue of Deuteronomy 5.

All the way at the end of the Bible in Revelation, the praising of God for His marvelous works is first given based on His creative efforts, and then it is based on His redemptive efforts. We are being shown spiritual truths in how God lays out His word, and His plans. The Feasts of the Lord, therefore, will contain such spiritual truths. God is the Creator, and He is also the Redeemer. His feasts will show us the redemptive process of man through pictures of the coming Christ.

^4 (con’t) which you shall proclaim at their appointed times.

In the annual calendar, the arrival of each feast was proclaimed at its time appointed by the Lord. This was done with trumpet blasts, heralding in the start of the feast day.

It is to be noted now that although all of the feasts are appointed by the Lord in anticipation of the their fulfillment in Christ Jesus, not all of them are actually fulfilled on a specific day. For example, no specific calendar day is given for the feast of Firstfruits. The feast of Weeks is based on the feast of Firstfruits, whenever that would occur, fifty days later would come Weeks. No calendar day is specified for either in Scripture.

The feast of Yom Kippur is specified for the 10^th day of the 7^th month, but it was literally fulfilled on the same day as the Passover when Christ died as both our Passover Lamb, and our Atoning Sacrifice. The calendar was set for Israel to demonstrate a logical order in which redemptive acts take place, but that order is actually realized solely in the now-fulfilled work of Christ.

These feasts can logically be ordered, not according to the calendar year, but on what they have accomplished through the life and ministry of Christ Jesus. A breakdown of this would be –

A. Yom Teruah (Day of Acclamation) – Birth of Christ into humanity: a redemptive act tied to the beginning of the Creation calendar.

B. Pesakh (Passover) – Redemption: a one-time redemptive act based on the perfect life of Christ, summed up in His birth through crucifixion.

B. Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement) – Atonement: a one-time redemptive act based on the perfect life of Christ, summed up in His birth through crucifixion.

A. Bikurim (Firstfruits) – Resurrection: Birth of Christ from the dead: a one-time redemptive act on a date determined by the Lord.

C. Ha’Matsot (Unleavened Bread) – Sanctification: a redemptive act, ongoing for God’s people; those who are “in Christ.”

D. Shavuoth (Weeks) – God indwelling man: made available because of the crucifixion and resurrection. A one-time redemptive act on a date determined by the timing of the resurrection.

D. Sukkoth (Tabernacles) – God dwelling with man: proven by the resurrection. The feast sums up the purpose of all redemptive acts of the Lord. It is ongoing for God’s people, even to eternity.

⁵ On the fourteenth day of the first month

The day mandated here was first determined in Exodus 12:6, but it must be taken in the proper context of Exodus 12. There it said –

“Speak to all the congregation of Israel, saying: ‘On the tenth of this month every man shall take for himself a lamb, according to the house of his father, a lamb for a household. ⁴ And if the household is too small for the lamb, let him and his neighbor next to his house take it according to the number of the persons; according to each man’s need you shall make your count for the lamb. ⁵ Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year. You may take it from the sheep or from the goats. ⁶ Now you shall keep it until the fourteenth day of the same month.’” Exodus 12:3-6

When the Lord spoke those words to Israel, it was the very first time that the term edah, or congregation, was used. That word comes from another word yaad which means “to appoint” or “to meet.” They were first called at the time of the Exodus to be a congregation of people involved in a united act according to the commandment of God.

The Passover as a feast of the Lord is based on that original Passover held at the time of the Exodus from the bondage of Egypt. It was that redemptive act which was to now be celebrated annually on the same day of the original occurrence. But that was merely a picture of the coming work of Christ, delivering humanity from the bondage of sin under the devil’s yoke.

On the tenth day of the month, the people were told to take a lamb according to the house of the father. That means appropriate to the size of the house. The word “lamb” used there was seh and it simply means one of the flock, either a goat or a lamb. They were to take such an animal, without blemish, and keep it until the fourteenth of the month.

Everything about the Passover was given in anticipation of Christ Jesus. In that original Passover, the lamb was a sacrifice which would, because of its nourishment, carry the people through the exodus of their redemption from Egypt. Jesus is called the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world in John 1:29.

His life, because of its nourishment, carries the believer through the exodus of our redemption from the world of sin and death, which Egypt pictures. Paul, in the New Testament, explicitly calls Jesus our Passover offering in 1 Corinthians 5:7 –

“Therefore purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened. For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us.”

That the lamb was to be without blemish is seen realized in Christ’s perfect life. In Luke 23, after his interrogation concerning the Lord, Pilate declared Jesus without fault –

“So Pilate said to the chief priests and the crowd, ‘I find no fault in this Man.’” Luke 23:4

In Hebrews 7:26, we also read this about Jesus –

“For such a High Priest was fitting for us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners…” Hebrews 7:26

And Peter, writing to the Jews of the dispersion, refers directly to the Passover for his description of Jesus –

“…knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers, ¹⁹ but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot.” 1 Peter 1:18, 19

No defect was to be seen in the Passover lambs because they were to picture to the world the perfect, undefiled, and spotless Lamb of God. As we read, the selected animal was further specified as “a male of the first year.” This requirement was given to the Hebrews as a note concerning the lamb standing in place of the firstborn. In the plague upon Egypt, all the firstborn were to die, but for those of Israel, the firstborn was to be redeemed through the death of the lamb. Thus it is an act of substitution. The mandate also looked ahead to Christ.

In the first year, an animal is considered more perfect in terms of innocence, and yet it is in the midst of life. Later in Exodus, it was prescribed that such offerings came after the eighth day of their life. This is the same day that a baby is circumcised.

Therefore the chosen animals picture the innocent Christ in the midst of life. Not a baby in Bethlehem, and not an old man in Nazareth, but a male in Jerusalem in the midst of His life, and yet endowed with innocence. It was He who was to be made an Offering of redemption. He was born without original sin, lived without any sort of committed transgression, and was humble, pure, undefiled, and harmless. Christ is the epitome of what we would think of in such an innocent animal, and He is what the Passover animal was to prefigure.

Along with being of the first year, one more aspect of the animal was noted. It could be either from the sheep or the goats. Both animals are used as sacrifices in the Bible for various reasons. The exception which allowed for either a sheep or a goat was probably given to allow the poorer people to buy a less valuable goat instead of a sheep. The smell of the goat offering is not as sweet as a lamb, but it was acceptable as a sin offering. It was a picture of Christ. As Paul in 2 Corinthians 5, says –

“For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” 2 Corinthians 5:21

The Lamb, having the finer smell, also pictures Christ as Paul’s words of Ephesians 5 state –

“And walk in love, as Christ also has loved us and given Himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling aroma.” Ephesians 5:2

The lamb was generally considered the more likely choice at the Passover and among the people, but either animal ultimately pictured Christ. Thus the Lord allowed either for the feast. And so, understanding these previously provided guidelines which were given to Israel, it is on the fourteenth day of the first month that the Passover would begin. As it next says…

^5 (con’t) at twilight 

The Hebrew here says ben ha’arbayim – “between the evenings.” It seems like a perplexing phrase, but it is one which accounts for biblical time. In the Bible, a day is divided into “evening” and “morning.” Thus there are actually two evenings to be reckoned. The first began after twelve and went through until sunset.

The second evening began at sunset and continued till night, meaning the whole time of twilight. This would therefore be between twelve o’clock and the termination of twilight. Between the evenings then is a phrase which allows the three o’clock sacrifices at the temple to be considered as the evening sacrifice even though to us it would otherwise be considered an afternoon sacrifice. This is the same time-frame that Christ died on the cross, which is recorded in the gospels as three o’clock in the afternoon.

The term, ben ha’arbayim, or “between the evenings” is used 11 times in the Bible. Each time it details the work of Christ; the time of day when He died on the cross. Later in Scripture, this term would eventually become known as the time of the “evening offering,” or simply “the sacrifice.” This is found, for example, in the great challenge between the 450 prophets of Baal and Elijah –

“And it came to pass, at the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice, that Elijah the prophet came near and said, ‘Lord God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, let it be known this day that You are God in Israel and I am Your servant, and that I have done all these things at Your word. ³⁷ Hear me, O Lord, hear me, that this people may know that You are the Lord God, and that You have turned their hearts back to You again.’” 1 Kings 18:36, 37

This time became so important to the Jews, that even during exile when the sacrifices had stopped being made, those who were observant still used that time of day to make a sacrifice of prayer, petition, and praise to God. This is seen in Daniel 9:20, 21 –

“Now while I was speaking, praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before the Lord my God for the holy mountain of my God, ²¹ yes, while I was speaking in prayer, the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, reached me about the time of the evening offering.”

^5 (con’t) is the Lord’s Passover.

pesakh l’Yehovah – “Passover to Yehovah.” I must note now that only the first Passover, when leaving Egypt, required several things which were never required again. One of them was the selecting of the animal on the tenth day of the month. Nothing is said about that later in Scripture. However, that specified period was given for a specific reason. It was to show that Christ would someday come and be crucified on a Friday. Despite many incorrect challenges to this throughout the years, the Bible bears witness that Christ died on a Friday, the 14^th day of the month.

From selection to slaughter is a period of five days. If one selects an animal on the tenth day and sacrifices it in the evening of the fourteenth day, it is a total of five days. The animal of that original Passover was to be kept during that period, and until the time of the Passover. The reason for the Lord mandating this was not that the family could observe it for defects as is so often claimed.

Rather, it was selected because it had no defects. Animals with defects were noted and disregarded at the selection of the animal. The reason for this advanced time was to ensure that everyone had an animal ready for the Passover.

The instructions were probably given to the people before the plague of darkness came upon the land. That plague lasted three full days. Therefore, the selection five days earlier was necessary. However, in picture that five-day period anticipated Christ’s final week, from the evening of Palm Sunday until the evening of the Passover, a time-frame which the four gospels record as being five full days. In Mark 11:11 it says –

“And Jesus went into Jerusalem and into the temple. So when He had looked around at all things, as the hour was already late, He went out to Bethany with the twelve.” Mark 11:11

If one counts five evenings from Sunday evening, they will come to Friday evening. Sunday evening to Monday evening is one. Monday to Tuesday is two. Tuesday to Wednesday is three. Wednesday to Thursday is four. And Thursday to Friday is five. If anyone is interested in a detailed breakdown of the four gospels showing exactly this, all they need to do is go to the written update

of this sermon at the Superior Word website and I will include it at the end of the sermon.

The key to understanding the timeline for Christ’s day of crucifixion is the term “Preparation Day” which is included in all four gospels. If one follows the timeline and notes that term, they can see the perfection of how the timeline given back in Exodus is realized in the harmoniously recorded gospels. There are four aspects of the original Passover that were only required that one time, but which were never repeated again –

1) Eating of the Passover in Goshen.
2) Selecting the lamb on the tenth day.
3) Striking the blood of the lamb on the lintels of the houses.
4) Eating the lamb in haste.

These were one-time events which succeeding generations did not have levied upon them. Thus, the original Passover alone serves as the necessary picture of the greater work of Christ. As an annual feast of the Lord, it was both commemorative of what occurred in delivery from Egypt, and that delivery from Egypt was in anticipation of the full and final delivery of man from the bondage of sin and the yoke of the devil.

A Lamb, spotless, and pure – without any defect
Will be sacrificed in my place
And looking at that Lamb, I can certainly detect
The greatest love and grace… this I see looking upon His face

Oh! That I could refrain and not see Him die
Oh! If there could be any other way
How could this Lamb go through with it for one such as I?
Oh God! This perfect Lamb alone my sin-debt can pay

Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!
Behold the sinless One, there on Calvary’s tree
He has prevailed and the path to heaven has been unfurled
The Lamb of God who died for sinners like you and me

II. The Feast of Unleavened Bread (verses 6-8)

Like the instructions for the Passover, an analysis of the Feast of Unleavened Bread would be incomplete without referring to the original mandate for the feast in Exodus 12 –

“Seven days you shall eat unleavened bread. On the first day you shall remove leaven from your houses. For whoever eats leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day, that person shall be cut off from Israel. ¹⁶ On the first day there shall be a holy convocation, and on the seventh day there shall be a holy convocation for you. No manner of work shall be done on them; but that which everyone must eat—that only may be prepared by you. ¹⁷ So you shall observe the Feast of Unleavened Bread, for on this same day I will have brought your armies out of the land of Egypt. Therefore you shall observe this day throughout your generations as an everlasting ordinance. ¹⁸ In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at evening, you shall eat unleavened bread, until the twenty-first day of the month at evening. ¹⁹ For seven days no leaven shall be found in your houses, since whoever eats what is leavened, that same person shall be cut off from the congregation of Israel, whether he is a stranger or a native of the land. ²⁰ You shall eat nothing leavened; in all your dwellings you shall eat unleavened bread.” Exodus 12:15-20

⁶ And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the Feast of Unleavened Bread to the Lord;

The day after the Passover, a new feast is introduced, to which the Passover is joined. However, the word “feast” here is not the same as that used in verses 2 or 4. That was moed, this is khag. It is not good when translations fail to make a distinction between these completely different words. The moed of the previous verses should be translated as “appointed times.” The word khag can then rightly be translated as “feast.”

The word khag comes from khagag, which in turn, indicates “to move in a circle” or specifically “to march in a sacred procession.” From there you have the implication of being giddy; to celebrate, dance, and feast. It is to be a time of worship, celebration, and sacrifice. It is a pilgrim feast.

The word is based on the same root as the name of the prophet Haggai and it is also connected to the Arabic word for hajj, which muslims perform when they make a trek to Mecca to worship their false god. If you look at photos of their hajj, you will see them going in a circle as they move towards the idol of their false god, a black stone called the al-Ḥajar al-Aswad; the Black Stone. This is the general idea of the khagag. One moves in a circle in a sacred procession; thus celebrating, dancing, and feasting.

This and the final feast, Sukkoth, are the only two of Leviticus 23 which use the term khag. They are also both set off as more than single days, but rather each encompasses an entire week. However, as we will see later in Scripture, the Feast of Weeks will also be a part of a khag, or pilgrim feast, as well.

Although the Passover and Unleavened bread are both annual feasts of the Lord, and even though they eventually will became united in terminology, the Feast of Unleavened Bread is a separate and distinct celebration with its own picture and fulfillment in Christ and in His church.

As the Passover is on the 14th of the month, this feast immediately follows from the 15th to the 21st day of the month. Every year at this time, it was to be the standard observance of the people. The 15^th of the month would be the time of the full moon.

^6 (con’t) seven days you must eat unleavened bread.

Exodus 12:15 says the same thing as here, but it further said that on the first day of the feast, they were to remove all leaven from their houses. Whatever day of the week the 15th fell on, they were required to do this, and they were to keep it out for a full week. During this time, they were to eat unleavened bread.

The reason for this at the Exodus was that it pictured the complete removal of the yeast of Egypt from their bread. In the Bible, bread is the fundamental means of sustaining the body – even a symbol of life itself. If one didn’t remove the yeast of Egypt, it showed that they longed after that which Egypt provided.

In essence, they had failed to separate themselves from the life they were called to leave. The removal of Egyptian yeast thus symbolized their new life, being purified from their old means of sustaining life. This was to be commemorated year by year, eating unleavened bread as a memorial to their redemption.

In general, yeast can be considered in two ways. First it causes fermentation, and thus corruption. But it also causes the bread to rise, thus picturing pride, which itself is a form of corruption. The remembrance of the feast is given to remind them of having been severed from the wicked practices of Egypt.

However, the type is given for us to see the Anti-type, Jesus, and His perfection. It is also to remind us of our obligation to act in a pure and undefiled manner. This is explicitly stated by Paul in 1 Corinthians 5. The Corinthians were having issues with immorality in the church and Paul wrote to them words of correction. In them he identifies both Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread –

“Your glorying is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? ⁷ Therefore purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened. For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us. ⁸ Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.” 1 Corinthians 5:6-8

We have been called out of “spiritual Egypt,” meaning the fallen world. If we don’t remove the yeast of Egypt, meaning the old immoral ways of the world, it shows that we still long after that which the world provides rather than what Christ has granted. As always, every word we are seeing in the Old Testament is pointing to a much larger picture of redemptive history.

In the words of this verse, we are given a positive command, “seven days you must eat unleavened bread.” This is explicit. For seven days, unleavened bread was to be eaten. It doesn’t say “You may not eat bread with leaven for seven days.” Instead it says, “seven days you must eat unleavened bread.”

It is not a negative command, which means that they could abstain from any bread as long as they didn’t partake in leavened bread. Instead it is a positive command. They were to eat unleavened bread during the entire feast. This goes in picture to what was just cited from Paul in 1 Corinthians, “let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.”

Not only are we to not partake of sin, but we are to actively live our lives in “sincerity and truth.” It is not that we can abstain from the whole if we abstain from one; it is that we are to abstain from one while partaking in the other. And this is a most important point. What has become fashionable with Judaizers and the Hebrew Roots movement, is to cite those verses from Paul as an indication that we are still required to observe the feasts of Leviticus 23.

He is not at all saying this. He is taking those feasts, and spiritualizing them into our new life in Christ. We are no more required to observe the Leviticus 23 feasts, than we are required to go to Jerusalem to do so, and while there be required to perform the necessary sacrifices attached to the feasts. Don’t get duped into believing what those heretics pass on. In Christ we are deemed as sinless, and we are asked to act in accord with that. That is the substance over the shadow. That is the gold on the table.

⁷ On the first day you shall have a holy convocation;

miqra qodesh, or “convocation holy,” is called for on the 15th of the month. It was to be a gathering of the people for sacrifice, prayer, and fellowship. It may also have included instruction as well. As I said earlier, these convocations were called by the blowing of silver trumpets which were directed by the Lord to be made for this purpose. That is recorded in Numbers 10:10 –

“Also in the day of your gladness, in your appointed feasts, and at the beginning of your months, you shall blow the trumpets over your burnt offerings and over the sacrifices of your peace offerings; and they shall be a memorial for you before your God: I am the Lord your God.”

^7 (con’t) you shall do no customary work on it.

meleket abodah, or “work servile,” means employment or other regular work. This then is not a Sabbath observance which forbid work of any kind, including cooking meals. In Exodus 12:16 it was explicitly noted that food could be prepared on this particular day of convocation. Thus it was not a Sabbath. Why is this important to know? It is because it once again identifies what is correct concerning the death of Christ. The gospels precisely state that the day following Christ’s crucifixion was a Sabbath, not a convocation. In Luke 23, this is recorded –

“Then he took it down, wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a tomb that was hewn out of the rock, where no one had ever lain before. ⁵⁴ That day was the Preparation, and the Sabbath drew near.

⁵⁵ And the women who had come with Him from Galilee followed after, and they observed the tomb and how His body was laid. ⁵⁶ Then they returned and prepared spices and fragrant oils. And they rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment.” Luke 23:53-56

Therefore, understanding the terminology here and in that of the gospels, we can know, along with other assurances, that Christ’s cross occurred on a Friday, not a Wednesday or a Thursday.

⁸ But you shall offer an offering made by fire to the Lord for seven days.

The specific offerings to be made to the Lord are not detailed until Numbers 28. They will include two young bulls, one ram, and seven lambs in their first year. Each was to be without blemish. Along with those, a specified grain offering was to be made. Further, a goat for a sin offering was to be made. This same offering was to be made on each day of the feast, along with the regular daily offerings of the priests.

*^{8  (fin)} The seventh day shall be a holy convocation; you shall do no customary work on it.’”

The seventh day of the feast would be the 21^st of the month. A second miqra qodesh, or “convocation holy” was to be held on this day. However, in Exodus 13:6, this seventh day was specifically identified as its own khag, or feast, to the Lord. Israel was to not merely abstain from work, but they were to actively celebrate the work of the Lord. The entire week was to be a feast, but the seventh day was to be a feast unto itself as a festive termination to the entire feast.

Concerning the Exodus account, some Christian scholars attempt to align the resurrection of Christ with the day that Israel was conducted through the Red Sea. However, this would not align with the table of stops recorded in Numbers 33. The Jewish calendar reckons this seventh day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread as that day. Accordingly, the final day of the Feast would be the day they passed through the waters of the Red Sea. This is correct, and there is a reason for this.

The two holy convocations bracket the feast. One occurs on the first day of the feast and one on the seventh. They stand as representative of the entire period of the feast. But this feast that Israel celebrated is only a picture of our time in Christ in this earthly life, from the day of our adoption until the day we go home to glory, pictured by passing through the Red Sea.

Just as the Red Sea stood before Israel, there is an impossible gulf for us to cross over. And yet the Lord has made that way possible. He has taken the natural and combined it with the miraculous in order to allow His redeemed to cross over to safety on the other shore where our heavenly home awaits. This is the symbolism we are to see in the observance of the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread.

We are redeemed by Christ through His cross, pictured by the Passover. We then enter into our Christian life, pictured by the seven days of the Feast of Unleavened Bread. At the end, we are conducted home through that once impossible-to-pass-through gulf, pictured by that final, joyous, feast day.

By the 21^st day of the month, the full moon of the first day of the feast became a waning moon. The darkness would have been more pronounced, just as it is in our deaths, but there was still a brighter light to lead us. It is Christ in us, the hope of glory. The path for our full and complete redemption has been paved through that impossible gulf where every drop of water will be removed for our passage. There will be guaranteed safety as we pass through into His glory.

Either death or rapture is coming. The Lord is carefully watching over His flock until that day. When the time of our calling arrives, the infinite gulf will be parted. We, His redeemed, will pass through with ease and safety. This is all pictured in the annual celebration of Israel in the conjoined feasts of the Lord – Passover and Unleavened Bread. Concerning both the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread, in Christ we proclaim, “Feasts fulfilled.”

Closing Verse: “A little leaven leavens the whole lump.” Galatians 5:9

Next Week: Luke 1:35 Announcing history’s greatest event! (The Son of the Highest and of a Maidservant) (Christmas Sermon)

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. Even if you have a lifetime of sin heaped up behind you, He can wash it away and purify you completely and wholly. So follow Him and trust Him and He will do marvelous things for you and through you.

Passover and Unleavened Bread

‘These are the feasts of the Lord
Holy convocations which you shall proclaim
At their appointed times
Each year it shall be the same

On the fourteenth day
Of the first month at twilight
Is the Lord’s Passover
A time when the moon is full and burning bright

And on the fifteenth day
Of the same month, pay heed to what is said
Is the Feast of Unleavened Bread to the Lord
Seven days you must eat unleavened bread

On the first day
You shall have a holy convocation
You shall do no customary work on it
So it shall be for the entire nation 

But you shall offer an offering
Made by fire to the Lord for seven days, so to you I submit
The seventh day shall be a holy convocation
You shall do no customary work on it

The Passover is fulfilled as says 1 Corinthians 5:7
And for this we are ever grateful to the Lord
It is through His cross that we can return to heaven
So we are assured in Your word

And the feast of Unleavened Bread
It is fulfilled as well in Christ Jesus
To Him we now live in it, as the word has said
Great things, O God, You have done for us!

Hallelujah to You, O God, great things You have done!
Hallelujah to You, O God, for the giving of Jesus Your Son!

Hallelujah and Amen…

———————————————————————–

Timeline of Christ’s Passion Week –

Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey on Sunday, 6 April 0032. This is based on dating from the prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27 and the exemplary work of Sir Robert Anderson.

However, people will still try to find a reason why the crucifixion wasn’t on Friday, 11 April 0032. There are a couple reasons why this is disputed, each which certainly results from misunderstanding of biblical terminology. The first is a fear that what’s stated in Matthew 12:40 would mean an error in what Jesus said. The second results from a perceived conflict between the gospel accounts in Matthew, Mark, and Luke and that of John.

In the first disputed reason, Jesus is quoted by Matthew as saying, “For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” Matthew 12:40

The resurrection certainly occurred on a Sunday and only the most extreme cases dispute this – and they do it without justification. Some folks fear that because He rose on a Sunday and it was “3 days and 3 nights” that Jesus was in the tomb then it was either Wednesday or Thursday that He must have gone to the cross. It’s important to note that this verse is from Matthew and is directed to the Jewish people – Jesus as King. Hebrew idioms would have been understood and not needed any clarification or verbal amending. To the audience Matthew was writing to any part of a day is considered to be inclusive of the whole day. It’s no different than terminology we use today. If I arrive in Florida on a plane at 11:30pm on 11 April, during a later conversation I would still say I was in Florida on that day. The biblical pattern of “evening and morning” being a day goes back to the first chapter of the Bible and includes an entire day – regardless of what part of a day one is referring to.

The same verse, as recorded in Luke says, “As the crowds increased, Jesus said, “This is a wicked generation. It asks for a miraculous sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah. For as Jonah was a sign to the Ninevites, so also will the Son of Man be to this generation.” Luke 11:29, 20 In this instance, Luke was not writing to only Jewish people, but predominately to non-Jewish people – Jesus as the Son of Man. Therefore, the terminology is amended to avoid confusion. This occurs many times in the gospels and therefore the addressees (or the background of the writers themselves) need to be identified to understand proper terminology.

The second issue to be resolved is that some scholars claim that John “appears” to place the crucifixion on a different date than the other writers. Because of this, an attempt to insert some second type of Passover meal is made. This supposedly helps the Bible out of an apparent problem. However, no such meal is identified in the Bible – at any time. Nor is it necessary to make something erroneous like this up. The Bible identifies the timing of the entire Passion Week, dispelling the problem. The terminology for “Preparation Day” used in all four gospel accounts absolutely clears this up and will be noted below.

Here’s what you need to know:

Paul plainly states that the Feast of Firstfruits is a picture of the resurrection:

“But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.” 1 Corinthians 15:20

The feast of Firstfruits was a Sunday according to Leviticus 23:15 – “From the day after the Sabbath, the day you brought the sheaf of the wave offering, count off seven full weeks.” Note: the Sabbath is a Saturday. We don’t need to go any further there to know this is correct and that Christ rose on a Sunday.

Here is the math from the gospel accounts. It’s all there in black and white and very easy to look up –

**“Six days before the Passover, Jesus arrived at Bethany, where Lazarus lived, whom Jesus had raised from the dead.” John 12:1 This would have been a Sabbath day (Saturday.)

**“The next day the great crowd that had come for the Feast heard that Jesus was on his way to Jerusalem.” John 12:12 This would have been 5 days before the Passover, meaning Sunday (Palm Sunday) as the Passover would have started Thursday night at sundown and run until Friday night at sundown (remember biblical days start at sundown).

The account couldn’t be clearer that the next day after the Passover was a Sabbath. This is indicated several times. Some people have attempted to use the terminology in John (it was a “high day” or a “special Sabbath”) to indicate that it could have been a day other than a Saturday. Special Sabbaths are specified in Leviticus and don’t necessarily fall on Saturdays. However, the term “Sabbath” as used in the other gospel accounts is indicating a Saturday. There is no indication, anywhere, that there were two Sabbaths in a row on this particular week. In fact, such an analysis does an injustice to the reading of the text. Therefore, the special Sabbath occurred on a regular Sabbath day (Saturday).

From this we can give the entire week’s schedule (refer to the cited verses in your own Bible to familiarize yourself with what’s being said) –

Sabbath 6 before // John 12:1 – …six days before the Passover.  Bethany/Lazarus.

Sunday 5 before // John 12:12 & Mark 11:10 – The next day…  Palm Sunday/Riding the donkey.

Monday 4 before //  Mark 11:12 Now on the next day… Jesus cursed the fig tree.

Tuesday 3 before //  Mark 11:20 Now in the morning… The withered fig is identified.

Wednesday 2 before // The gospels are silent on what occurred on this day.

Thursday 1 before – Passover starts at Sundown //Mark 14:1 After two days it was the Passover… (this is the first timing mentioned since Mark 11:20 which was Tuesday).

–

Note:  Pay special attention to the fact that in the following accounts Mark is using Jewish time (sunset to sunset and John is using Roman time) –

Mark 14:12 – “Now on the first day of Unleavened Bread when they killed the Passover Lamb.” 

John 13:1 – “Now before the Feast of the Passover….”  Meal, Washing of Feet, Gethsemane. 

***Christ crucified this same 24 hour period, but it was obviously after the final night at Gethsemane and then the illegal trial.  Mark is speaking of this event from sundown, John is speaking of it on Roman time (this is obvious because they use different terminology for the same meal where Judas left to betray the Lord… can’t miss this point and get it right.)

6 days before – Saturday

5 days before – Sunday

4 days before – Monday

3 days before – Tuesday

2 days before – Wednesday

1 day before – Thursday

The Day – Friday

The problem with people believing that John was speaking of a different day (as mentioned above) is that they miss the fact that the terminology for the day is different based on the author. To clear up any misunderstanding between the synoptic gospels and the Gospel of John, one needs only to compare the uses for the term “Preparation Day.” Once one does this, there are no discrepancies in the accounts –

Matthew 27:62 – “The next day, the one after the Preparation Day, the chief priests and the Pharisees went to Pilate.” This was the day after the crucifixion. Matthew says it is the day “after Preparation Day.”

Mark 15:42 – “It was Preparation Day (that is, the day before the Sabbath). So as evening approached…” This is the day of the crucifixion. Mark says “It was Preparation Day.”

Luke 23:5 – “It was Preparation Day, and the Sabbath was about to begin.” This is the day of the crucifixion. Luke says “It was Preparation Day.”

John 19:14 – “Now it was Preparation Day of the Passover.” This is the day of the crucifixion. John says “It was Preparation Day.”

Based on the biblical evidence, there is

1. No discrepancy between any of the accounts.

2. Jesus was crucified on a Friday.

3. Jesus rose on a Sunday.

As a final note, the Bible says 13 times that He was raised “on” the third day. This is mentioned by Jesus himself as well as the apostles. Therefore, it must have been Friday that Christ was crucified.

——————————————————————–

Please don’t believe (as some have claimed) that Christ rode the donkey into Jerusalem on a Saturday instead of a Sunday. This would have been the Sabbath. If He did, He would have violated the law –

“Observe the Sabbath day, to keep it holy, as the LORD your God commanded you. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your ox, nor your donkey, nor any of your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates, that your male servant and your female servant may rest as well as you.” Deuteronomy 5:12-14

There is no need to make the assertion it was a Saturday unless you simply wanted to finagle the dating. There is also no biblical provision for an exemption to the commandment prohibiting working a donkey. As stated above, the work of Sir Robert Anderson in the 1800s clearly demonstrates that Jesus rode into Jerusalem on 6 April 0032. This can be validated in other ways and is the correct year and month for the Lord’s crucifixion.

The biblical evidence is quite clear and without ambiguity or total uncertainty…Jesus Christ was crucified as the Passover Lamb on Friday, 11 April 0032 and was resurrected to eternal life on Sunday 13 April 0032.

He now offers eternal life to all who call on Him by faith. Have you accepted His offer of peace?

Leviticus 23:1-3
The Feasts of the Lord
The Sabbath

We enter today into the Feasts of the Lord. There are varying views on these Feasts, but in a quick categorical outline, we can identify a few major ones. The first is that these feasts are “for Israel.” Some even call them “The Feasts of Israel” or the “Jewish Feasts.” Type either into your search bar and this will come up immediately. This is wrong from the outset as will be explained, but simply stated, Scripture calls them “Feasts of the Lord.” We are to go no further.

A second view is that these feasts are divided up into “spring feasts,” and “fall feasts,” and that these divisions are then given in relation to Christ’s two advents. In other words, He fulfilled the first four feasts in His first advent, and He will fulfill the last three in His second advent. This is problematic for several reasons.

First, there are actually eight feasts, not seven. The first is a weekly feast throughout the year, and the other seven are annual feasts. Secondly, He fulfilled all, not half of them in His first advent. I would say that this makes that view rather problematic.

Another view is that the spring feasts are fulfilled in His first coming, and the fall feasts are too, but they have a future application in His second advent which pertains to the nation of Israel alone. This is problematic because it then makes these, by default, Feasts of Israel, which is something that those who hold to this view explicitly state. They equivocate on the naming of the feasts in order to justify this unjustifiable stand.

What is true and correct, is that all eight feasts are Feasts of the Lord, and they are fulfilled in the work of Christ. They are a part of the law of Moses, a law which is explicitly stated to be fulfilled by Christ in the epistles, and which is recorded numerous times in the word of God. And not only is the law fulfilled, it is 1) obsolete; 2) annulled; 3) set aside; 4) nailed to the cross. These terms are all explicitly stated in the New Testament. The law is done. It is true that Israel is given seven more years under the law to accomplish certain things according to Daniel 9, but these things are in relation to Christ’s finished work of the law, not in acceptable observance of a now-obsolete law.

To say that Christ has yet to fulfill the three fall feasts, is to say that Christ did not fulfill the law. If Christ did not fulfill the law, then Christ is not the end of the law for all who believe. If the law is not fulfilled, then the law is still in effect for all people. When it says in Romans that there is “now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus,” we can be assured that this is in error because the law brings wrath, and it brings condemnation. If Christ didn’t fulfill the law, He is not the Messiah, we are not “in Christ,” because we have put our hope in someone who is not Christ, and the law, in its entirety, is still binding on us today.

This doesn’t just mean the parts that we want to observe, like maybe the Sabbath or not eating pork (ewww bacon!), but all of the law. It means that we are condemned for wearing clothes made of two different materials. We are condemned when we fail to tithe (give, give, give!). We are condemned when we harvest anything in the seventh year of the Sabbath-year cycle. We are condemned if we don’t have tassels on the four corners of our garments… Shall I go on? Remember what James says, if we keep the entire law, and yet stumble in one point, we are guilty of it all. If Christ didn’t fulfill the law, including the feasts, we stand – condemned.

Text Verse: “So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, ¹⁷ which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ.” Colossians 2:16, 17

I imagine you will hear this text verse for the next few weeks as we open each sermon on the Feasts of the Lord. Paul’s words about food and drink are given in relation to the dietary laws of Israel. Let no one judge you in such things. The law is dead; nailed to the cross. His words regarding a festival are “the Feasts of the Lord” found here in Leviticus 23. Let no one judge you in such things. The law is dead; nailed to the cross. His note about “sabbaths” is inclusive of the Feast of the Lord known as the Sabbath, and of all Sabbath observance. He uses the plural to cover any and all Sabbaths which are found in Israel’s yearly calendar. Let no one judge you in such things. The law is dead; nailed to the cross.

In fact, what Paul is doing in this verse is citing Hosea 2:11 concerning these same things in relation to Israel. Israel would be judged by such things, but in Christ, we are not. It’s fun for heretics to pick and choose what they will or will not do in the church, but it won’t be fun when they stand before the Lord and find that they made a mockery of His finished work by deciding that what He did wasn’t enough in their own narcissistic minds to please God. He asks us to trust in Christ, and in Christ alone. It’s not that difficult unless you just can’t stop looking in the mirror all day.

Today we will look over the Feast of the Lord known as the Sabbath. There are four major views within what we would call “Christianity” on the Sabbath. The first is that of the Seventh Day Adventists – it is a moral law of God, and it is binding. Saturday is to be a Sabbath, and it is mandatory for all “Christians.” This is something the Hebrew Roots movement also teaches.

The second is the “Christian Sabbath” view. This is where the Sabbath is changed to Sunday, and it is a mandatory day of observance. The third belongs to Luther. He says that the Sabbath was for the Jews, and it does not pertain to Christians, but rest and worship, though required, are not connected to any particular day.

The fourth view is the “Fulfilled Sabbath.” Fulfilled means… fulfilled. In Christ, we enter our rest, as the Bible states. Paul says in Romans 14, “One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind” (verse 5). Obviously, taking Paul’s words cited earlier, and this verse here, along with simple Christian logic, the fulfilled view is correct. The first is heresy, and it will only bring condemnation. The second will be addressed later, but it is nonsense. The third is not found in Scripture, although it isn’t heretical or necessarily nonsense. It’s just not correct.

As far as the first, the heresy of Sabbath observance as a necessary requirement in today’s church is pitiful. All the information we need for salvation is found in Paul’s epistles. He, as the apostle to the Gentiles, defines clearly and precisely what we need to do to be saved; what we need to do in order to be pleasing to God; and how to also instruct others in meeting those same goals.

Nowhere does he say anything concerning the Sabbath, except to argue against observing it. What part of the concept of “grace” these heretics don’t understand is hard to grasp. It’s a simple word with a simple meaning, as is the concept of a gift. One does not work in order to receive a gift. And though the Sabbath is a day of not actively working, it is a day of spiritual work in order to not physically work. Our hope and our rest is in Christ alone. This is a fundamental truth which is found in sound Christian doctrine. It’s all to be found in His superior word. And so let’s turn to that precious word once again and… May God speak to us through His word today and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. The Feasts of the Lord (verses 1 & 2)

And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying,

The main addressee here, as is most commonly seen, is Moses. It is he who will receive the laws laid out here, directly from the Lord. In the preceding chapters, we have been given directions and commands concerning the holiness of the sanctuary, the holiness of the priests, the holiness of the people, the holiness of the sacrifices, and so on. All of these were in relation to the holiness of the Lord. This chapter now details the holiness of the Lord in relation to the annual calendar – times of special observances within each year.

² “Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them:

The Lord’s words to Moses are directed to bene yisrael, or “the children of Israel.” The term ben literally means, “son.” However, the translation as “children” is appropriate. The reason for this is theological in nature. In the book of Galatians, Paul writes that as long as an heir is a child, he is no different than a slave. He then says in Galatians 4:3, “Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world.” However, He goes on in the next verses to say, “But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons” (4, 5).

In Christ, we go from being “children,” with no true rights in the family, to becoming sons with full rights. As he says in Galatians 4:7, “Therefore you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.” That alone stands as a testimony to the superiority of the New Covenant over the Old. The Old simply anticipated the New. In Christ, the Old is gone because it has been fulfilled in Him. The address now as “children” is appropriate. They will now be given instructions as children, who are required to do certain things, in anticipation of the time when these things are realized in Christ.

^2 (con’t) ‘The feasts of the Lord,

moade Yehovah – “Appointed times (of) Yehovah.” The name Yehovah, translated as “the Lord,” is used 36 times in this chapter. There then is a heavy stress on this divine name. In contrast to this, the name “Israel,” when speaking of the people of the nation, is used only seven times, and it is always in the sense of being the addressee (five times), or of the responsibilities laid upon them (two times). This is rather important to remember. These are not “Feasts of Israel,” nor is that term ever used in Scripture. When the feasts are mentioned, it is always in relation to the Lord, directly or indirectly. In using the term “Feasts of Israel,” as has become popular in modern times, it takes the focus off the Lord entirely, but it is the Lord, meaning Jesus, who has fulfilled each and every one of these feasts.

By stating they are feasts of Israel, a misguided concept of these somehow having a future fulfillment in national Israel is seen. This makes for incredibly bad theology, and it harms evangelistic efforts which otherwise might be effective. If people see the fulfillment of these feasts in their proper light, meaning in Christ Jesus, they will then be able to see their need for Christ Jesus. If Israel is the focus, this truth becomes obscured, or even eliminated.

The Hebrew word for “feast” is moed. This comes from yaad, meaning to appoint, assign, designate, etc. That in turn comes from a primitive root meaning to fix upon, as by agreement or appointment. Thus, the moed is a specific meeting in time, place, and/or appointment. Its first use in Scripture was in Genesis 1:14 when the stars were set in the heavens to be for signs and l’moadim, or “for seasons.”

Charles Benson states, “These, in our translation, are termed feasts; but the word here used, rather means solemn seasons, or meetings, and as the day of atonement was comprehended in them, which was not a feast, but a fast, they certainly are improperly termed feasts.”

If one looks at these set times in a forward-looking way, he is correct. There is as much set restriction as there is command to accomplish. One cannot work on the Sabbath. In the Feast of Weeks, the people are told to do no customary work, etc. However, if one in our dispensation looks back on what these feasts anticipated, and rightly sees their fulfillment in Christ, then they truly are “feasts” of the Lord for us to revel in. He did the work, we receive, and feast upon, the benefits of that work. Still, Benson is right. what is a more appropriate term would be “appointed times.”

^2 (con’t) which you shall proclaim to be holy convocations,

asher tiqre-u otam miqrae qodesh – “which you shall call out calling-outs holy.” The word “convocations” here is miqra. It comes from the word qara, which is also in this verse, translated as “proclaim.” Moses is instructed to “call out” the coming feasts as assemblies, thus “calling outs” or “convocations.”

^2 (con’t) these are My feasts.

eleh hem moadai – “These they, My feasts.” The term moadai, or “My feasts,” is only used here and in Ezekiel 44:24 where it is speaking of the future millennial reign of Christ where His feasts and Sabbaths will again be observed. This should in no way cause confusion with the believer in Christ in this dispensation. In the millennium, some feasts will be observed by Israel in commemoration of what Christ did. This in no way means that these are to be observed now. In fact, to mandate observance of these feasts is to set aside the grace of Christ who fulfilled them for us. Paul speaks of this in Galatians 4:9-11, where he says –

“But now after you have known God, or rather are known by God, how is it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements, to which you desire again to be in bondage? ¹⁰ You observe days and months and seasons and years. ¹¹ I am afraid for you, lest I have labored for you in vain.”

It is a futile thing indeed to attempt to merit God’s favor apart from the work of Christ. To set aside what Christ has done, and to attempt to please God through observance of an appointed meeting that has met its appointed fulfillment in Jesus’ work, is to merit bringing God’s wrath down upon oneself. Let us not be so foolish as to have this attitude of ingratitude. If we believe we can attain holiness through observing these feasts, we maintain that we have not become holy through Christ. What a slap in the face of God!

Feasts to the Lord; they were accomplished as is appointed
Together we celebrate what the Lord has done
They are fulfilled in Christ, the One who was anointed
In these feasts, we see the work of God’s own Son

Our observance isn’t as the law mandated
No, our observance is in how we act toward our Lord Jesus
In Him we have our Sabbath rest; so the Bible has stated
And that is just the first of eight fulfilled by Christ for us

Each reveals something marvelous accomplished by the Lord
And so to Him, we gratefully give thanks and praise
With Him always in our thoughts, and contemplating His word
We find the fulfillment of these special, festal days

II. The Feast of the Sabbath (verse 3)

³ ‘Six days shall work be done,

sheshet yamim te-aseh melakah – “six days you shall do work.” These words are directive in nature. Therefore the week is divided into two sections, active work and active cessation from work. Man is not to be idle when he should be working, and man is not to be working when he should be at rest. What is curious is that one person is being addressed. The verb is second-person singular. This is odd because at the end of the verse, the verb will be plural.

The workweek in Israel is based on a seven-day calendar, beginning on Sunday and ending on Saturday, just as it is in the US today. Unlike our time schedule today though, each day begins at evening and goes through until the next evening. Thus Sunday, the first day of the week, begins at evening – literally sundown – on Saturday, and goes through until sundown the next day.

Things that needed to be done were to be done before the Sabbath so that no work was to be done on the Sabbath. This, however, does not mean that one must work every day. If so, for example, it would violate the other mandated feasts of the Lord. Rather, what should be done was to be done, but not on the Sabbath.

This pattern of working six days has its source in the early Genesis account. The evening/morning schedule is recorded at the end of each day of creation, beginning with Genesis 1:5. With the completion of creation on the sixth day, the record then states –

“Thus the heavens and the earth, and all the host of them, were finished. ² And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. ³ Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.” Genesis 2:1-3

Thus, Israel was instructed to labor six days and rest on the seventh, as is next seen…

^3 (con’t) but the seventh day is a Sabbath of solemn rest,

Here the term, shabath shabathon, or “(a) resting day of solemn resting” is used. This specific term, shabath shabathon, is only used six times in Scripture. Four times it speaks of the weekly Sabbath, once for the Day of Atonement, and once concerning the year of Jubilee. The people were to rest, and they were to contemplate God and His works on their behalf.

Concerning this term, shabath, or Sabbath. It first must be understood that this is referring to Saturday. Biblically, there is no such thing as a Sunday Sabbath. To say, “Today is the Sabbath,” only means, “Today is a Saturday, and it is my day of rest.” There is no transfer of Sabbath to Sunday to be found in Scripture. That is a fallacy known as a “category mistake.”

Understanding this, the word shabath implies rest and cessation from labor. This cessation of labor for Israel merely looks forward to a different type of rest. It was a foretaste of the blessed eternal rest which man lost, but which was promised to be restored. Man was created outside of the Garden of Eden and was rested in the Garden to worship and serve His God. This was lost.

Despite this matching the pattern of creation, and despite the Lord sanctifying the seventh day as a day of rest, even from the seventh day after the creation began, there is no record of anyone observing a Sabbath, meaning a Saturday day of rest, until after the Exodus from Egypt. At the time of the giving of the manna, the Lord, through Moses, instituted the first Sabbath –

Then he said to them, “This is what the Lord has said: ‘Tomorrow is a Sabbath rest, a holy Sabbath to the Lord. Bake what you will bake today, and boil what you will boil; and lay up for yourselves all that remains, to be kept until morning.’” Exodus 16:23

Those who say that a Sabbath is still required today must make things up about what occurred at that time, saying that there was confusion in the elders about what to do on the Sabbath because they had this double portion on Friday and they were confused about what to do with the second portion on Saturday. Would they be allowed to violate the Sabbath to prepare it?

This is nonsense. Nothing in Scripture indicates that the Sabbath existed at all until that point in history. Not a single verse outside of Genesis 2:3 hints at it. Further, the text itself later disproves it. Secondly, Genesis 2:3 only became a written fact at the giving of the law through Moses, and more, it was only written after the account concerning the manna in Exodus. Genesis 2:3 simply describes the fact that God sanctified the seventh day, but it goes no further than that.

There is nothing prescriptive added to the general statement which was made in Genesis. Thirdly, the reason is given for the Sabbath in the presentation of the Ten Commandments in Exodus 20 and in Deuteronomy 5, but the reason given for it is different in both. In Exodus 20 it is based on Creation, “For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth” (20:11). But in Deuteronomy 5, it is based on Redemption, “And remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the Lord your God brought you out from there by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm; therefore the Lord your God commanded you to keep the Sabbath day” (5:15).

Despite this, the two are tied together. Israel was already redeemed at the giving of the law at Sinai. Therefore, as a sign of God’s rest following His creative efforts, which had subsequently been lost in the Garden of Eden, the redeemed of Israel were given the Sabbath.

Thus there is no contradiction between Exodus and Deuteronomy. One acts leads to another. The fallen world could not be redeemed unless it had first been created. Everything is looking forward to God’s rest; a rest which can only be found in Christ. As the law could only bring a curse, then the Sabbath was only a shadow, looking forward to Christ’s fulfillment of it.

At the time after the Exodus, the Sabbath was uniquely revealed to Israel. It was at the time of their organization as a nation to show that the Lord is Creator and Redeemer. Until that point, there was no need to mandate the Sabbath to the world. And further, the words to the people in Exodus 16 when the Sabbath was first given directly clue us into this because it said there, “Tomorrow is a Sabbath rest.” It does not say ha’shabbat, or “the Sabbath.” Instead, it leaves off a definite article. If the people were aware of the Sabbath as an institution, it would have said ha’shabbat, “the Sabbath.” It does not. Instead, Moses was made aware of it in connection to the giving of the manna.

Unfortunately, some versions, utterly mistranslate that verse and add in two definite articles which don’t exist in the Hebrew. They say, “To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the LORD” (KJV). By adding these in, they insert inappropriate and confused theology to the text.

And finally, in the same line of thought, Moses gave additional specificity by repeating the words and adding in the word “holy.” He said to Israel, “Tomorrow is a Sabbath rest, a holy Sabbath to the Lord.” The entire phrase of Exodus 16:23 smacks of, and implies, uniqueness, and thus first-time instruction concerning Sabbath requirements.

The reason why it’s important to know this is because of the highly divergent teachings on the Sabbath within Christianity. Those who teach that a Saturday Sabbath is required for Christians today, will make the claim that it is an eternal standard of God that always existed for humanity. This verse in Exodus shows this is not true.

In the giving of the Sabbath in connection with the Manna came two pictures of Christ. He is our Bread, and He is also our Rest. That He is our Rest is seen explicitly in Hebrews 4:3, “For we who have believed do enter that rest.” By faith in Christ, our heavenly Bread, we enter into God’s eternal rest, pictured by the giving of the Sabbath along with the Manna. It is only a picture. This continued to be revealed in Exodus 16. In verse 25, it then said –

Then Moses said, “Eat that today, for today is a Sabbath to the Lord; today you will not find it in the field.” Exodus 16:25

Again, there was no article in front of “Sabbath.” It simply said, “a Sabbath.” However, this was the formal institution of the Sabbath for Israel, and so it actually precedes the giving of the law. As the formal institution, the name was given to designate the day. Next, Exodus 16 shows that God provided in advance of the Sabbath for the Sabbath by providing manna. And third, He directed that what was provided on Friday was to be prepared on Friday, in advance of the Sabbath. It then formed a picture of Christ coming after the giving of the law. He gave us Christ, and then He gave us rest in Christ via fulfilling the law.

The law was annulled through His completed work, and with it the Sabbath day requirement was annulled. However, as an ordinance to Israel, there was more for them to learn at the time of the giving of both the manna and the Sabbath. In verse 26 of the same chapter, it said, “Six days you shall gather it, but on the seventh day, the Sabbath, there will be none.”

In saying this to Israel, it was to be understood that this first Sabbath wasn’t a one-time occurrence. Rather it was to become the standard at all times and as long as the manna was provided. However, it could be inferred at that time that the Sabbath was then only to be observed during that period when the manna was given. It wasn’t until the giving of the law, that the Sabbath was fully incorporated into what was expected of Israel, even apart from the times when manna was given. One might ask, “Who cares about that?” But for Israel, we see an incremental giving of instructions for the Lord to progressively reveal His intentions to the people.

Step by step, the Lord methodically shaped Israel to become His obedient people. By giving them the Sabbath in connection with the giving of the manna, He was preparing them for a time when the Sabbath would be required apart from the manna. Which would have been easier for people to adjust to? Being given two portions of manna and being told to prepare them on Friday and then not work on Saturday, or being told to prepare food on Friday and not do anything on Saturday when houses were full of things they had stored up through normal life?

The giving of the manna for six days and withholding it on the seventh, before entering a normal agricultural setting, was a valuable preparation for the time when the manna would no longer be provided. The wisdom of God is seen in how He introduced the Sabbath into the lives of His people, Israel.

After this initial giving of the Sabbath, it was incorporated into the Ten Commandment in Exodus 20, giving specifics about what could not be done on that day. After that, it was introduced again in Exodus 31 where it was given great specificity. In those verses, a unique chiastic structure was given –

Exodus 31:13-17 – The Sabbath Rest
A Sign between the Lord and Israel (7/11/2016)

a. Surely My Sabbaths you shall keep
—-b. For it is a sign between Me and you
——–c. Throughout your generations,
————d. You shall keep the Sabbath, therefore, for it is holy to you
—————-e. Everyone who profanes it shall surely be put to death
——————–f. For whoever does any work on it
————————x. Work shall be done for six days,but the seventh is the Sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord
——————–f. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day
—————-e. He shall surely be put to death
————d. Therefore the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath
——–c. Throughout their generations as a perpetual covenant
—-b. It is a sign between Me and the children of Israel
a. On the seventh day He rested and was refreshed

In the first half of the chiasm, it explains the requirement. It then gives the naming of the punishment first and then the reason for the punishment. The second half of the chiasm does the opposite. It gives the reason for the punishment, then the naming of the punishment, and then the explanatory basis for the sequence.

In the Old Covenant, man worked and then rested. In the New Covenant, man rests and then works. A picture is made of the process of salvation in the two dispensations. Israel worked six days and then rested on the Sabbath. It was in anticipation of the time of rest which lay ahead when all things would be restored.

With Christ’s coming we rest in honor of His finished work, and then we conduct our work week. This is why in the first half of the chiasm, line e gives the penalty – death, and then line f gives the reason for the penalty – working on the Sabbath. Whereas in the second half of the chiasm, the order is reversed. First is noted the reason for the penalty – working, and then is given the penalty – death. Our rest is in Christ and what He has done. We have died to the law; we now live and work in Christ.

Understanding this, we see in Exodus 31 that the Lord told Israel that the Sabbath would be a sign between Him and them, a sign of sanctification. However, for the believer in Christ, we do not receive our sign of sanctification through an external observance. Rather, our sign of sanctification is the sealing of the Holy Spirit. It is received simply by placing faith in the finished work of Christ. Paul notes this in Romans 15 –

“Nevertheless, brethren, I have written more boldly to you on some points, as reminding you, because of the grace given to me by God, ¹⁶ that I might be a minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering of the Gentiles might be acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit.” Romans 15:15, 16

The sign of the Sabbath is not at all for this dispensation. With Christ’s coming, we rest first in Him and in honor of His finished work, and then we conduct our work. This is the lesson found back in Exodus 31 for those who will pay heed. After that, the Sabbath was mentioned one more time in Exodus. In 35:2, the mandating of the Sabbath is given with the warning that anyone who works on that day was to be put to death. After that, it immediately added in something new to the Sabbath laws saying, “You shall kindle no fire throughout your dwellings on the Sabbath day” (Exodus 35:3).

Along with all the other things that the people were already told to not do on the Sabbath day, a new requirement was added in. No fire was to be kindled in any dwelling on the Sabbath. No manna was provided on the Sabbath and so they were to prepare their food a day in advance of the Sabbath. As a further restraint, they were told to not even kindle a fire. To kindle a fire was a laborious process of work. As food wasn’t cooked, they were not to consider making a fire for any other reason. As John Lange says about this –

“The addition, prohibiting the kindling of fire, indicates that the law of the Sabbath is made more rigorous in the matter of abstinence.” John Lange

The Israelites were to actively abstain from work in every possible way. The same is not true now. In Christ, we are given a different aspect of the same precept. We are not told to abstain from every work in order to attempt to merit God’s favor. Instead, we are to rest in the finished work of Christ. In the end, whether before the cross or after, it is all done in relation to Christ.

And that brings us to the relationship of the placement of the Sabbath requirements given in Exodus 31 and then in Exodus 35. In Exodus 25 through the first half of Exodus 31, the instructions for the construction of the tabernacle were given. Immediately after that long section came the giving of the Sabbath law verses, showing that they were a sign of sanctification to Israel.

In chapter 35 came the details of the actual construction of the tabernacle. That went all the way until the end of the book. But just prior to those details was the final note concerning the Sabbath requirements. Understanding the placement of these two Sabbath law passages shows us a simple and profound truth. The keeping of the Sabbath by Israel was tied directly into the presence of the Lord among them. It was He who sanctified them, and the Sabbath was a sign of that sanctification.

Now, in Christ, we have what that sign only pictured. As it says in Hebrews 4:3, “For we who have believed do enter that rest.” The word used there to describe this rest is found in Acts 7 where Stephen cites the Lord’s question concerning His place of rest, and then it is used 11 more times, but only in the book of Hebrews. There it explains the meaning of entering God’s rest. It is a rest which is not at all found in the Sabbath day, but in Christ.

In fact, in the New Testament, outside of the gospels, which describe Jesus’ fulfilling the law, the term “Sabbath” is found only 10 times. Nine of those are in Acts, and are only used in relation to Jewish/Synagogue observance. The final time is in Colossians 2, our text verse today, where Paul adamantly speaks against being judged by anyone in relation to Sabbath observance.

The reason for this is that Christ is our place of rest. It is through Him that we are granted access, once again, into that Garden of Delight that we were expelled from so long ago. As Paul says, “the substance is of Christ.” What is important to understand is that Paul’s epistles are doctrine for the church age. To ignore his letters means there is no doctrine for the church age. All theology thus becomes a pick and choose path to God.

Attempting to be justified before God through works sets aside both the notion of receiving a gift as well as the granting of grace. This is the error of those who state that we are to observe these festivals of the Lord, including the Sabbath, in order to be pleasing to Him. One cannot merit grace. It simply must be received. Anything else… is not grace. Mandatory Sabbath observance is a heresy.

^3 (con’t) a holy convocation.

miqra qodesh – convocation holy. This is what verse 2 specified for the feast days, and this is what is now repeated for the Sabbath. It is a holy convocation. The Lord is calling His people, Israel, to observe this day as a holy calling. Unlike the next seven feasts, this is the only weekly one, and thus it is set apart from the others. However, this in no way means that it is not a Feast of the Lord. What is does mean, however, is that no other feast was to take precedence over it. Some of the feasts lasted a full week, and at times, others may have lined up with a Sabbath day. In such cases, the Sabbath requirements were not to be set aside. Instead, the Sabbath was to be kept to the Lord, despite whatever else occurred. This included the prohibition that…

^3 (con’t) You shall do no work on it; 

kal melakah lo taasu – All work no you shall do. The verb is second-person plural. No work was to be conducted on a Sabbath day. There is no exemption from this. However, it is noted in Scripture, and by the mouth of the Lord, that priestly duties were to continue even on Sabbath days. This is seen in Matthew 12 –

At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. And His disciples were hungry, and began to pluck heads of grain and to eat. ² And when the Pharisees saw it, they said to Him, “Look, Your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath!”

³ But He said to them, “Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, he and those who were with him: ⁴ how he entered the house of God and ate the showbread which was not lawful for him to eat, nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests? ⁵ Or have you not read in the law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are blameless? ⁶ Yet I say to you that in this place there is One greater than the temple. ⁷ But if you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless. ⁸ For the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.” Matthew 12:1-8

The priest’s duties to the Lord took priority over a Sabbath Day observance. Think it through. As those whose duties to the Lord were exempt, how much more then are those who are “in” the Lord because of His finished work also exempt from this. He is the Lord of the Sabbath; we are placed in Christ through faith in what He has done, and therefore we are no longer under the laws which only pointed to Him.

*^3 (fin) it is the Sabbath of the Lord in all your dwellings.

This translation here is confusing and should rather read, “…it is a Sabbath to the Lord in all your dwellings.” Otherwise, it seems like the Lord is even now working six days and taking the seventh off. Rather, they were to work and then rest to the Lord, honoring Him on this special day dedicated to Him.

Now, with His having fulfilled the law, we enter God’s rest. This is the reason why the first part of the sentence is in the second-person singular – “Six days you shall work.” The Lord speaks specifically to Christ. “You (alone) shall do the work.” In the second half, it is in the second-personal plural – “All work you (all) shall not do.” This cannot be arbitrary, and it cannot simply be attributed to scholarly error. It is far too obvious to be a mistake. Instead, it is instructive.

It is speaking of us resting in Christ’s accomplished work. “You Christ My Son, shall do the work. You all, My people,shall rest in My Son’s work. It is His effort, and not in our own effort. The words of Jesus, Paul, and the author of Hebrews all agree that our true rest is found in Christ, and in Him alone. The Sabbath was only a picture of what was to come. Concerning the Sabbath, in Christ we proclaim, “Feast fulfilled.”

With that knowledge, we are to rest in Christ, trust in Christ, and be pleased to have been reconciled to God solely by the work of Christ. Thank God for Jesus Christ. If you are listening to this sermon, and if you are trying to merit God’s favor through your works, be it Sabbath observance, or helping ladies across the street, you’re a making a fundamental mistake. You are placing yourself in the equation. What you need to do is to remove yourself, and put Jesus in it, completely and wholly. By trusting in what He has done, you will be in the sweet spot, and on your way to glory.

Closing Verse: “For he who has entered His rest has himself also ceased from his works as God did from His.” Hebrews 4:10

Next Week: Leviticus 23:4-8 Redeemed and living in holiness; Christ as our Head… (The Feasts of the Lord, The Passover and Unleavened Bread) (37^th Leviticus Sermon)

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. Even if you have a lifetime of sin heaped up behind you, He can wash it away and purify you completely and wholly. So follow Him and trust Him and He will do marvelous things for you and through you.

The Feasts of the Lord, The Sabbath

And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying
These are the words He was then relaying

“Speak to the children of Israel
And say to them: ‘The feasts of the Lord
Which you shall proclaim to be holy convocations
These are My feasts; pay heed now to My word

‘Six days shall work be done
But the seventh day is a Sabbath of solemn rest
A holy convocation
You shall do no work on it; as previously addressed 

It is the Sabbath of the Lord
In all your dwellings, pay heed to this word

Lord God, a Sabbath of rest You gave to Israel
A weekly feast to honor You
But in this feast is a story to tell
A story of what Christ Jesus did do

He came to this place of work, toil, and sweat
And He labored for us so that we could truly find rest
In Him the work is finished; the requirement is met
And so now in Him, we are eternally blessed

We read in Hebrews 4 and verse number 3
That in Him when we believe we find our true rest
The feast is fulfilled; we now rest peacefully
Yes, in Christ Jesus, we are eternally blessed

Hallelujah to You, O God, great things You have done!
Hallelujah to You, O God, for the giving of Jesus Your Son!

Hallelujah and Amen…

Leviticus 22:1-33
I am the Lord

In this chapter, there are several sub-divisions. The first section is directed to the responsibilities of the priests. Then comes a short section on the rights of the priesthood and those who may, to some extent, join in those rights. After that is a section on suitable offerings, and those which are to be rejected. And finally, there is a short section which further defines sacrificial parameters.

These are certainly not the end of the sacrifices mentioned in Leviticus, but they are a necessary part prior to what lies ahead. One would think that with all of the detail, and all of the repetition in this book, the people would have not only known what to do, but would have done it. Or if they did those things, they would at least have done them properly.

Think it through, we have the Lord. He has established a priesthood which performs at a specific sanctuary, and what they do is based on specific guidelines. The things that are brought to them are based on minute details of what is acceptable and what is not. The people were aware of these things, and so if they didn’t want to do them, as detailed, then why do them at all?

Again, think it through… in order for the offering to be accepted, it had to meet all of these specific criteria. As the offering is to the Lord, and as mandated by the Lord, then it would make no sense to offer anything at all unless it was properly done. Right? Why would you go to work if you knew you were not only going to not be paid, but that you would also be beaten for showing up? And the reason for this is that you refused to wear the right uniform.

If you did, you would get paid and not beaten up. But as long as you wear the wrong one, there is no benefit in even going, much less going inappropriately. This is what Israel is being instructed on, and so they knew what to expect if they didn’t pay heed to what they were supposed to do. And yet, they still didn’t do… what they were supposed to do!

Text Verse:“Your first father sinned,
And your mediators have transgressed against Me.
²⁸ Therefore I will profane the princes of the sanctuary;
I will give Jacob to the curse,
And Israel to reproaches.” Isaiah 43:27, 28

This isn’t just an arbitrary verse about Israel failing to pay heed. Instead, they had been told, such as here in Leviticus. They were warned again, such as in Deuteronomy. And they were continuously warned throughout their history. On one page, there is disobedience, on the next there is punishment, and on the next there is mourning and repentance. What a bunch of dolts, yes?

Well… let’s not be too finger pointy in that. In the church, we have a far better covenant, based on far betters promises, and much more latitude in what we can and cannot do. And yes, we also have exacting specifications laid out for us to do them. And yet, with a Bible in every house, and a church on every corner, we can’t seem to do any better than Israel did.

We have perverts in the pulpit, we have sacrifices which are tainted with immorality, and we have flowing discharges of licentious behavior oozing out of the pews of church after church. It’s hard to imagine how this can be.

In particular, the churches which today openly condone homosexuality and every other perverse type of behavior one can imagine. Like Israel of old, do they somehow think the Lord will ignore this? Do they think Israel’s bringing a maimed, blind, or stolen animal to the altar is somehow different than their tainted spiritual offerings?

And what about each one of us. Where are we in our devotion to Christ? Where are we in our holy and acceptable offerings? If He were reading your heart right now (and He is), do you think what He pries out of it will be pleasing to Him?

What are you doing here today? If it is to supposedly be pleasing to the Lord… well then, you’d better be working on being pleasing to the Lord. A standard was given to Israel; a standard is given to us. You shall therefore be holy because the Lord Your God, named Jesus, is holy. This is the lesson we are to see in these passages. It’s all to be found in His superior word. And so let’s turn to that precious word once again and… May God speak to us through His word today and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. For and Of the Priesthood (verses 1-16)

Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying,

Here we have the standard formula for introducing a new section of thought by the Lord. The Lord speaks to Moses, indicating a new set of instructions and laws are forthcoming. The last section dealt with that which made a priest suitable for ministering to the Lord, or excluding him from his duties. This will continue with that.

There are times when they would naturally become unclean. When such times arose, they were to abstain from their duties, and to even keep away from partaking of the holy portions. This is set in contrast to a priest with a defect which closed out the previous chapter. He could not perform the duties of a priest, but he was allowed to partake of the holy portions. The restrictions on uncleanness are stricter than those of mere physical defect. This is now seen in the following words…

² “Speak to Aaron and his sons,

The words of this section are directed only to the priests of Israel, and not to the common people. They have a particular set of instructions which are expected to be followed.

^2 (con’t) that they separate themselves from the holy things of the children of Israel, and that they do not profane My holy name by what they dedicate to Me: I am the Lord.

These words are looking forward to what will be said. The holiness of the Lord, and ensuring that His name is glorified, is so important that it is highlighted even before the ways in which it can be profaned are given. To understand this, it would be like saying to those being commissioned as officers in the Air Force, “You will separate yourselves from the uniform of the service so that you do not bring disgrace upon it.” One might immediately say, “But I am being given this commission. Why would I separate myself from the uniform which signifies my commission?”

He has prematurely asked what will next be answered with the occasions for doing what has just been stated. Thus, for the priests of Israel, this is an emphatic statement, given in advance of the details. The honor of the Lord is preeminent. The ways for maintaining the honor of that name are now to be defined…

³ Say to them: ‘Whoever of all your descendants throughout your generations, who goes near the holy things which the children of Israel dedicate to the Lord, while he has uncleanness upon him, that person shall be cut off from My presence: I am the Lord.

These words begin to explain how a priest can defile the holy name of the Lord. This first example is if he were to go near the holy things dedicated by the people while in a state of uncleanness. The holy things include the portions of the sacrifices which the priests were to receive as their food for sustenance. Any instance which renders a person unclean, of the many which have been detailed so far in Leviticus, had to be purified first. For some things, it simply meant that they had to wait until evening, for others, they may have had to wash themselves and/or their clothes, etc. Whatever was required to purify them, and which was not exactingly followed, meant their uncleanness remained. In such a state, if they partook of the holy things, they were to be cut off from the Lord’s presence.

This is the only time in the five books of Moses that this term, mil-l_ephanay, or “from My presence,” is used in this way. The normal term for excision is, “that soul shall be cut off from among his people.” But here, because it is dealing with the priests, they would be cut off from His presence. It is a solemn warning which would have served Nadab and Abihu well if they had known it, and it is a solemn warning which will be ignored by the sons of Eli in 1 Samuel, and which will result in disaster for them.

⁴ ‘Whatever man of the descendants of Aaron, who is a leper or has a discharge, shall not eat the holy offerings until he is clean.

The leper is specified in Chapter 13, the one with a discharge is specified in Chapter 15. Two things in particular are to be considered here. The first is that a person who is unclean is in a different category than a person who has a defect. As I said earlier, a person with a defect could eat of the holy things, but they could not minister before the Lord. But a person with uncleanness could not eat of the holy things. And yet, the unclean person was not permanently banned. Once he was cured, he could resume his duties and partake of the holy things. On the other hand, a person with a permanent defect was permanently banned from ministering because of the defect. It is the holiness of the Lord which is on preeminent display here.

^{4  (con’t)} And whoever touches anything made unclean by a corpse, or a man who has had an emission of semen,

Touching a corpse, or anything made unclean by a corpse, will be explained in Numbers 19. The emission of semen was detailed in Chapter 15. Such things made a person unclean for set periods of time, and they required exacting rites for purification.

⁵ or whoever touches any creeping thing by which he would be made unclean, or any person by whom he would become unclean, whatever his uncleanness may be—

Leviticus 11 detailed the creeping things which defiled. The second clause, that of touching a man by whom he would become unclean sums up a host of the things already detailed, such as a leper, a person with an emission, on so on. Such things as these brought about defilement which required purification.

⁶ the person who has touched any such thing shall be unclean until evening, and shall not eat the holy offerings unless he washes his body with water.

In this case, there are two stipulations. The first is that he is unclean until evening. One would assume that this would mean that he is clean after that time, as has been the case at other times for various types of contact. However, for the priest, unless he washes his body, he shall not eat of the holy offerings.

John Gill takes this as a type for the New Testament that a person who comes to Christ shall not take part in the Lord’s Supper until they are first baptized. That isn’t found in the New Testament, but it is an insightful exhortation nonetheless. Both are commanded by the Lord, and to do one without the other leaves a bit of a void in one’s full obedience to Christ. If you haven’t been baptized as an open profession of your faith, it is right that you do so.

⁷ And when the sun goes down he shall be clean; and afterward he may eat the holy offerings, because it is his food.

The previous verse required washing, but he remained unclean until the going down of the sun, at which time the new day began. With the coming of the new day, he was again recognized as clean. It was only after this that he could eat of the holy offerings. In essence, he was on a forced-fast due to his uncleanness for the duration of that time. This was then an important consideration for the priests to live holy, and to watch their conduct at all times.

The reason for the specificity here is because in general, priests were to be held to the highest standards at all times. But, in the case of such uncleanness, what might otherwise carry a greater penalty due to the office was mitigated. Nothing greater was imposed upon them than upon the common people because they needed their daily food. This is something that would have otherwise been deprived them.

⁸ Whatever dies naturally or is torn by beasts he shall not eat, to defile himself with it: I am the Lord.

To die naturally, or to die from being torn by beasts, meant that the animal had not been properly bled. This was already prohibited to the people of Israel in 17:15. In such a case for the common people, it says there that they were to wash their clothes, bathe in water, and be unclean until evening. However, for the priest, they were strictly forbidden from this at any time. If they disobeyed, they would defile themselves as priests. In Ezekiel 4:14, he adamantly proclaims that he had never done such a thing, and found any such thing completely abhorrent. He would never presume to do such a thing, especially because the priests had a greater weight of penalty to face if they presumed to do so…

⁹ ‘They shall therefore keep My ordinance, lest they bear sin for it and die thereby, if they profane it: I the Lord sanctify them.

Here, the term mishmarti, or “My watch” is translated as “My ordinance.” It says, “They shall therefore keep My watch.” It is a way of saying, “They shall always be on guard concerning this.” Unlike the common people who may accidentally eat of meat which was not properly bled, the priests had no excuse.

They received their food from the offerings of the people, they were the ones who were in charge of the offerings, and they were responsible for the blood rituals. There was actually no excuse for a priest to ever violate this. If they did, the Lord says that they would bear sin and die. To profane the watch of the Lord was to ignore the Lord who sanctified them. In verse 8, the Lord proclaimed His name, ani Yehovah. Now He proclaims His authority over them, ani Yehovah meqadesham, “I am Yehovah who sanctifies them.”

¹⁰ ‘No outsider shall eat the holy offering; one who dwells with the priest, or a hired servant, shall not eat the holy thing.

The word translated as “outsider” here is zur. It is elsewhere translated as a layman. It comes from a root which means “to turn aside,” as if in lodging. If the priest had someone like an old friend from high school, or the like, stop by for a visit, this person was not allowed to partake of the holy portions. The second class is a toshav, or sojourner. This might be someone who actually lives with the priest, even a non-permanent slave. The third class is a sakir, or hired servant. This is a wage earner under a priest. None of these would likewise be allowed to eat of a holy thing. They were not a permanent part of the house, and thus they were excluded from partaking. On the other hand…

¹¹ But if the priest buys a person with his money, he may eat it; and one who is born in his house may eat his food.

In both these cases, the people became permanent members of the household. According to Genesis 17, circumcision for such people was mandatory, and thus they became as Israelites in this regard. Because of this, it would not be right to deprive them of partaking in what the household itself was entitled to. If they were excepted from this, then the priest would otherwise be under obligation to provide two separate sources of food each day for his home. This was a burden the Lord did not levy upon them. Instead, they were accepted into the rights of the covenant people, and into the rights of the priestly household.

¹² If the priest’s daughter is married to an outsider, she may not eat of the holy offerings.

When a woman married, she joined a new house. Unless her husband was a priest, she was no longer deemed as a member of a priest’s household. Again, the word zur is used. He is other than of the priestly caste, and is not included in its privileges. In such a case, she gave up her right to partake of the holy offerings.

¹³ But if the priest’s daughter is a widow or divorced, and has no child, and has returned to her father’s house as in her youth, she may eat her father’s food; but no outsider shall eat it.

In losing her means of household through widowhood or divorce, she could again be brought under the household of her father and once again partake of the offerings. However, if she bore children, a new household was established with children of a non-priestly father. Thus, she could no longer be brought under his household. She was therefore excluded from the offerings. The verse ends with the same warning as in verse 10 to show the stringent nature of not allowing outsiders to eat of the offerings. However…

¹⁴ ‘And if a man eats the holy offering unintentionally, then he shall restore a holy offering to the priest, and add one-fifth to it.

This is a precept which finds its origin in verse 5:16. In this case, a person somehow unintentionally ate of a holy offering. As we know, ignorance of the law does not excuse guilt. In order to make restitution, he was required to restore the original value through a holy offering, and then add a fifth to its value. This was to instruct Israel to carefully watch how they conducted their affairs in regards to that which was deemed holy.

¹⁵ They shall not profane the holy offerings of the children of Israel, which they offer to the Lord,

The major question of this verse is, “Who is ‘they’ referring to?” Some translations just insert the word “priests,” assuming they are the subject. However, the preceding verses pertain to the laymen, not the priests, and so it is surely referring to them. Should they partake of the offerings when not so authorized, it is they who profane the offerings which have been raised up to the Lord.

¹⁶ or allow them to bear the guilt of trespass when they eat their holy offerings; for I the Lord sanctify them.’

Again, this is surely speaking of the people and not the priests, and so it should say something like “…and bring the burden of the guilt of trespass in their eating.” And then again, we read words almost identical to verse 9, ki ani Yehovah meqadesham, “for I am Yehovah who sanctifies them.” That was spoken about the priests, now it is about the people. It is the Lord who sanctifies both.

Unfortunately, the people failed to sanctify themselves. It was a chronic problem in Israel, one which led to two exiles, and much grief. The witnesses for their first exile called, and they didn’t listen, and so off to Babylon they went. The witnesses for their second exile called out, and they continued to ignore the Lord. Malachi, 430 years before the coming of Christ, spoke of Israel’s constant disobedience of the very precepts found in this chapter.

The entire book speaks against them, but chapter 1 is like reading a line by line indictment against them for infractions against these chapters of Leviticus. Let’s take a moment to read it…

“A son honors his father,
And a servant his master.
If then I am the Father,
Where is My honor?
And if I am a Master,
Where is My reverence?
Says the Lord of hosts
To you priests who despise My name.
Yet you say, ‘In what way have we despised Your name?’
⁷ “You offer defiled food on My altar,
But say,
‘In what way have we defiled You?’
By saying,
‘The table of the Lord is contemptible.’
⁸ And when you offer the blind as a sacrifice,
Is it not evil?
And when you offer the lame and sick,
Is it not evil?
Offer it then to your governor!
Would he be pleased with you?
Would he accept you favorably?”
Says the Lord of hosts.
⁹ “But now entreat God’s favor,
That He may be gracious to us.
While this is being done by your hands,
Will He accept you favorably?”
Says the Lord of hosts.
¹⁰ “Who is there even among you who would shut the doors,
So that you would not kindle fire on My altar in vain?
I have no pleasure in you,”
Says the Lord of hosts,
“Nor will I accept an offering from your hands.
¹¹ For from the rising of the sun, even to its going down,
My name shall be great among the Gentiles;
In every place incense shall be offered to My name,
And a pure offering;
For My name shall be great among the nations,”
Says the Lord of hosts.
¹² “But you profane it,
In that you say,
‘The table of the Lord is defiled;
And its fruit, its food, is contemptible.’
¹³ You also say,
‘Oh, what a weariness!’
And you sneer at it,”
Says the Lord of hosts.
“And you bring the stolen, the lame, and the sick;
Thus you bring an offering!
Should I accept this from your hand?”
Says the Lord.
¹⁴ “But cursed be the deceiver
Who has in his flock a male,
And takes a vow,
But sacrifices to the Lord what is blemished—
For I am a great King,”
Says the Lord of hosts,
“And My name is to be feared among the nations. Malachi 1

Walking holy before the Lord
For it is He who has sanctified us by His great name
And so in obedience to His word
We will offer nothing blemished, or that which is lame

Our sacrifices will be pure and undefiled
What we offer will be of the very best
For through His redemption we have been reconciled
And in His goodness alone, we find our place of rest

Yes, we shall walk in a holy and righteous way
We shall bring honor to the name of our Lord
For all our lives, through each and every day
We shall be obedient, to His magnificent, superior word

II. Acceptable and Unacceptable Offerings (verses 17-33)

¹⁷ And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying,

We have gone through the physical requirements to be a practicing priest, and also through the requirements for purity among them. Now the same type of precepts will be explained for the animals which are to be acceptable as offerings. Here the words of this verse introduce this new direction.

¹⁸ “Speak to Aaron and his sons, and to all the children of Israel, and say to them: ‘Whatever man of the house of Israel, or of the strangers in Israel, who offers his sacrifice for any of his vows or for any of his freewill offerings, which they offer to the Lord as a burnt offering—

The directions here are for both Aaron and his sons, as well as for all of Israel. What is to be offered by the people is to come with a right heart towards the Lord, and what is accepted by the priests is to be acknowledged as right and proper towards Him. The people’s offerings also include strangers, or proselytes. Any person who came to offer to the Lord was under the same obligations. The guidelines for the offerings themselves were detailed in Chapter 7.

¹⁹ you shall offer of your own free will a male without blemish from the cattle, from the sheep, or from the goats.

The wording here, rather that “of your own free will” should say, “that it may be accepted.” In other words, the verse is saying that the sacrifice must be a male for it to be accepted. This was to be from the cattle, sheep, or goats. Each of these, as detailed in past sermons, picture Christ in their own unique way. Not only did they do so in their nature, but also in that they are to be without blemish, just as Christ was without spot or blemish in His earthly ministry.

²⁰ Whatever has a defect, you shall not offer, for it shall not be acceptable on your behalf.

Just as the priests were to be without any defect, the same is true with the offering. In each point, we are to learn that we are to only give that which is perfect to the Lord. In today’s world, this does not mean our bodies must be perfect as then, nor must our offerings be perfect in their make up, but rather, both are to be perfect in that they are devoted to God through Christ, who perfectly passes them on to His Father. Each physical application now carries a spiritual meaning in the church age.

²¹ And whoever offers a sacrifice of a peace offering to the Lord, to fulfill his vow, or a freewill offering from the cattle or the sheep, it must be perfect to be accepted; there shall be no defect in it.

This verse seems to just be a repetition of the previous verses, but it is not. In the instructions for a peace offering found in Chapter 3, it says that it could be either of a male or a female. Thus, this verse is given to distinguish it from what has already been said of the other offerings. The peace offering to fulfill a vow would be based on some type of promise made to the Lord if He acted, such as in making a vow when facing danger. One made as a freewill offering would normally be presented to acknowledge mercies which had been received. In any such offerings, perfection was required. Again, they look forward to what God has done in Christ for us.

²² Those that are blind or broken or maimed, or have an ulcer or eczema or scabs, you shall not offer to the Lord, nor make an offering by fire of them on the altar to the Lord.

The verse is rather plan to understand, but a couple curiosities. First, the word “blind” is actually a noun used for the first of but three times, ivaron. As a noun, it would better be translated “blindness.” Secondly, the word “maimed” is more often translated as “determine” or “decree.” The idea is of pointing out sharply in a figurative sense. However, in a literal sense, when one points sharply, it will lead to maiming another, such as an animal. Third, the word yallepheth, or scabs which was introduced in Chapter 21 is now seen for the last time. Goodbye to it.

The repetition of “you shall not offer” and “nor make an offering of fire by them,” point to the responsibilities of both the layman and of the priest. They were to both be attentive to what they were offering to the Lord. If you remember from the last chapter, such defects also disqualified one as a priest to the Lord.

²³ Either a bull or a lamb that has any limb too long or too short you may offer as a freewill offering, but for a vow it shall not be accepted.

In this verse, a word used only once in the Bible is seen, qalat, or “too short.” This was considered a defect as much as a limb which was too long. The same type of defects seen in the priests are also seen in the animals here. However, this verse seems to contradict what was just said in verses 18-22, where this was prohibited as a free-will offering. Some say the verse has been corrupted, and it should say, “you may not offer.” The Greek translation of the OT says that you can slaughter them for yourself, but they are not to be offered. During the second temple period, it was said that they could be consecrated for the upkeep of the sanctuary, but they could not be sacrificed on the altar. Whichever is correct, the Hebrew of this verse presents difficulties.

²⁴ ‘You shall not offer to the Lord what is bruised or crushed, or torn or cut; nor shall you make any offering of them in your land.

The maak, or bruised, is introduced. It comes from a root meaning “to press.” One can see how that then results in a bruise. After that is a second new word, kathath, or crushed. It means “to crush by beating. A third new word, nathaq, or “torn away,” is seen. It would indicate some part of the animal was torn off. These, along with animals which were cut, could not be offered to the Lord.

²⁵ Nor from a foreigner’s hand shall you offer any of these as the bread of your God, because their corruption is in them, and defects are in them. They shall not be accepted on your behalf.’”

As with the people of Israel, so it was to be with the foreigner. The word here is not the same as that of verses 10 and 18. This word gives the sense of “son of the unknown.” It would be a person from another land looking to honor the God of Israel. No offering was to be made to the Lord with such defects because in order to represent what is acceptable to a perfect God, there must be perfection in what is offered to Him. This is then to be directly relayed to moral issues for those in Christ. All morality among His people must be in line with perfect righteousness.

One remarkable aspect of this verse is that a new word is introduced here, and which is used but two times in Scripture, miskhath, meaning disfigurement or corruption. The only other time it is seen is when speaking of Christ in Isaiah 52:14 –

“Just as many were astonished at you,
So His visage was marred more than any man,
And His form more than the sons of men;” Isaiah 52:14

What was considered unacceptable in these animal offerings is that which made us acceptable to God because of the work of Christ. It was His wrath poured out on the perfect Christ, not the corruption of the fallen world in an animal’s defect, which brings us close to Him once again. The offering of Christ was marred, but the mars were for our defects, not His.

²⁶ And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying:

The final section of the chapter commences with these words. In what is a break from most introductions, the words are spoken to Moses alone. There is no command to relay them to Aaron or to Israel, even though all would hear them when they were read.

²⁷ “When a bull or a sheep or a goat is born, it shall be seven days with its mother; and from the eighth day and thereafter it shall be accepted as an offering made by fire to the Lord.

Any of the three types of sacrificial animals was required to be with its mother for seven days. There are several suggested reasons for this. The first is that it is still weak in its first seven days, and thus is not a suitable offering to God. An animal of eight days would begin to be alert, able to get out and about, and the like.

Secondly, the animal had not yet been given a chance to exist, and the mother had not had a chance to enjoy her child. Thus it is a verse of mercy on both. Thirdly, the eighth day, like for circumcision of a child, signifies new beginnings. The old life is gone, and that which is new lies ahead, even if it is a life of sacrifice. This then would tie in with 1 Corinthians 7:14 where a child is sanctified by his believing parent. Otherwise it would be unclean. At a certain point, this would no longer be the case, and the child must come to God through Christ.

And finally, as a type of Christ, He being the Antitype of all suitable sacrifices, was not suffered to die in His infancy, which is what Herod wanted, but He died as a Man. Likewise, no man can be an acceptable sacrifice to God because of the infancy of their weakness and failings. Rather all must stand before God in the strength of Christ alone who is the perfection of that virtue and who was sacrificed on our behalf, if we so choose that most glorious option.

²⁸ Whether it is a cow or ewe, do not kill both her and her young on the same day.

A second prohibition is now levied on the sacrifice. However, the word for “kill” here is a general word, and doesn’t necessarily mean either, or both, are sacrificed, even though the tenor of the whole passage points to that, at least for one of the animals. It is generally accepted that this is a verse of mercy. For the animal, yes, but more so it is written for the bond of mother and child, and for the moral feelings of all who would understand the inappropriate nature of killing both in one day. To do so would blunt the natural sentiments of kindness and mercy in the heart.

²⁹ And when you offer a sacrifice of thanksgiving to the Lord, offer it of your own free will.

Again, as earlier, the word ratson in this verse means it should be translated as, “offer it for your acceptance.” This is not speaking of a free will offering, but of what follows next which will make the sacrifice acceptable.

³⁰ On the same day it shall be eaten; you shall leave none of it until morning: I am the Lord.

This is a command repeated from Leviticus 7:15. It is a prohibition similar to that of the Passover lamb in Exodus 12, and of the Manna in Exodus 16. Both were types of Christ, and this is as well. A thanksgiving offering is for something which has been accomplished, such as deliverance from affliction of some sort. God delivered, or provided, and so it wouldn’t be appropriate for an acknowledgment of it to be dragged out.

To consume the offering over more than one day would be to do just that, thus one would be benefiting off of the Lord’s deliverance instead of being grateful for it. If there was too much for one person to eat it, he should then share the offering with others, such as is explicitly prescribed in Deuteronomy 12. To not do so would not be showing the thanks that the offering implied. And to not share Christ, follows in the same self-centered way. Who is saved, truly grateful for that salvation, and yet unwilling to share what they have been given in Christ! This then is a theme fully developed by the author of Hebrews in verses 13:15, 16 –

“Therefore by Him let us continually offer the sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to His name. ¹⁶ But do not forget to do good and to share, for with such sacrifices God is well pleased.”

³¹ “Therefore you shall keep My commandments, and perform them: I am the Lord.

This, and the final two verses of the chapter, form the conclusion of the section. Everything that has been submitted is expected to be kept and performed. This is the same pattern which was seen at the end of Chapters 18 and 19. What is probable then, is that this concluding section covers everything in Chapters 20-22. They each build upon one another – conduct of the people; conduct of the priests; and acceptability of the priests and of the offerings. In order to impress upon them the importance of this, He repeats ani Yehovah, I am Yehovah.

³² You shall not profane My holy name, but I will be hallowed among the children of Israel. I am the Lord who sanctifies you,

The name is what everything centers on. To honor the Lord and to follow His commands is to hallow His name. To do otherwise is to profane His name. And thus He says that He will be hallowed among the people. He will either be hallowed among them, or he will be hallowed upon them. The choice is theirs. In verse 9, speaking of the priests, He said, “I Yehovah sanctify them.” In verse 16, speaking of the common people, He said, “…for I Yehovah sanctify them.” Now, he speaks to all collectively, ani Yehovah meqadishkem, “I am Yehovah who sanctifies you.” It is a note that all are to be holy, as He is holy.

³³ who brought you out of the land of Egypt, to be your God:

Again, as in Chapter 11, He ties His redemptive act of bringing the people out of Egypt into their need for sanctification. He redeemed; the people need to act on that redemption. It is the exact same thought we are given in the New Testament. The Lord saves, and so we are to respond to that salvation by being obedient, faithful followers of Him. We are to conduct our lives in the holy fear of the redemption in which we stand.

*^33 (fin) I am the Lord.”

ani Yehovah. I am Yehovah. The divine name has been used 21 times in this short chapter. Nine of those times, He proclaimed His name as who He is. His name represents His nature and being. In the coming chapter, He will take that name and define the way in which Israel is to honor and celebrate it throughout their year. Each of the ways that He reveals is a picture of Christ Jesus to come.

As this is so, then the divine name, Yehovah, is an anticipatory name, given to be used until the coming of Christ. This is an important precept to remember, and one which is missed by many in various off-shoots of Christianity which have arisen in the recent past. There is a move away from the name of Christ Jesus, or Yeshua, to the sanctifying of names which only looked forward to His completed work. It is the name of Christ Jesus which Paul says is above every name, and it is that name which he says every tongue should confess.

Let us not be found deficient in our theology by incorrectly esteeming any other name than that of Christ Jesus. Yehovah has revealed Himself, and He is our Lord. He is Jesus. When we read about the Lord’s desire for us to be holy as He is holy, all we need to do to get started is to look unto Jesus and emulate Him. It is in this way that we honor God the Father, and in no other. If you have been caught up in one of these sects which deviates from this teaching, pull yourselves up and out of it. Commit to Christ Jesus, and proclaim His name alone as Your hope.

“Let us recollect with gratitude that our great High Priest cannot be hindered by any thing from the discharge of his office. Let us also remember, that the Lord requires us to reverence his name, his truths, his ordinances, and commandments. Let us beware of hypocrisy, and examine ourselves concerning our sinful defilements, seeking to be purified from them in the blood of Christ, and by his sanctifying Spirit. Whoever attempts to expiate his own sin, or draws near in the pride of self-righteousness, puts as great an affront on Christ, as he who comes to the Lord’s table from the gratification of sinful lusts. Nor can the minister who loves the souls of the people, suffer them to continue in this dangerous delusion. He must call upon them, not only to repent of their sins, and forsake them; but to put their whole trust in the atonement of Christ, by faith in his name, for pardon and acceptance with God; thus only will the Lord make them holy, as his own people.” Matthew Henry

Closing Verse: “For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light ⁹ (for the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness, righteousness, and truth), ¹⁰ finding out what is acceptable to the Lord.” Ephesians 5:8 

Next Week: Leviticus 23:1-3 Six you work, one you rest – do the math… (The Feasts of the Lord, The Sabbath) (36^th Leviticus Sermon)

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. Even if you have a lifetime of sin heaped up behind you, He can wash it away and purify you completely and wholly. So follow Him and trust Him and He will do marvelous things for you and through you.

I Am the Lord

Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying
These are the words He was then relaying

“Speak to Aaron and his sons
That they from the holy things themselves separate
Of the children of Israel
And that they do not profane My holy name; get this straight

By what they dedicate to Me:
I am the Lord; so it shall be 

Say to them: ‘Whoever of all your descendants
Throughout your generations, according to this word
Who goes near the holy things
Which the children of Israel dedicate to the Lord

While he has uncleanness upon him, as you have heard
That person shall be cut off from My presence: I am the Lord

‘Whatever man of the descendants of Aaron
Yes any of them that is seen
Who is a leper or has a discharge
Shall not eat the holy offerings until he is clean

And whoever touches anything made by a corpse unclean
Or a man who has had an emission of semen; if such is seen

Or whoever touches any creeping thing
By which he would be made unclean before Me
Or any person by whom he would become unclean
Whatever his uncleanness may be— 

The person who has touched any such thing
Shall be unclean until evening, so shall it be
And shall not eat the holy offerings
Unless he washes with water his body

And when the sun goes down
He shall be clean; a reason for a happy mood
And afterward he may eat the holy offerings
Because it is his food

Whatever dies naturally or is torn by beasts, according to My word
He shall not eat, to defile himself with it: I am the Lord.

‘They shall therefore keep My ordinance
Lest they bear sin for it and die thereby
If they profane it
I the Lord sanctify them; this is why

‘No outsider shall eat the holy offering
One who dwells with the priest, or a hired servant too
Shall not eat the holy thing
So I am instructing you

But if the priest buys a person with his money
He may eat it; with this right he is imbued
And one who is born in his house
May eat his food

If the priest’s daughter is married to an outsider
She may not eat of the holy offerings; it is to be denied-her

But if the priest’s daughter is a widow or divorced
And has no child, and has to her father’s house returned
As in her youth, she may eat her father’s food
But no outsider shall eat it, this right he has not earned

‘And if a man eats the holy offering unintentionally
Then he shall restore a holy offering to the priest
And add one-fifth to it
And then the debt is ceased

They shall not profane the holy offerings
Of the children of Israel, which they offer to the Lord
Or allow them to bear the guilt of trespass
When they eat their holy offerings; for I the Lord sanctify them
———- So shall they heed this, My word

And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying
These are the words he was then relaying

“Speak to Aaron and his sons
And to all the children of Israel, and to them say:
‘Whatever man of the house of Israel
Or of the strangers in Israel, as I now relay

Who offers his sacrifice for any of his vows
Or for any of his freewill offerings
Which they offer to the Lord as a burnt offering
Yes, any of these profferings

You shall offer of your own free will
Be sure to take careful notes
A male without blemish
From the cattle, from the sheep, or from the goats

Whatever has a defect, you shall not offer
———-do not make this gaffe
For it shall not be acceptable on your behalf

And whoever offers a sacrifice of a peace offering
To the Lord, to fulfill his vow
Or a freewill offering from the cattle or the sheep
It must be perfect to be accepted; as I tell you now

There shall be no defect in it
This command I do to you submit

Those that are blind or broken or maimed
Or have an ulcer or eczema or scabs; heed now this word
You shall not offer to the Lord
Nor make an offering by fire of them on the altar to the Lord 

Either a bull or a lamb
That has any limb too long
Or too short you may offer as a freewill offering
But for a vow it shall not be accepted; do not get this wrong

You shall not offer to the Lord
What is bruised or crushed, or cut or torn
Nor shall you make any offering of them in your land
This to you I do now warn

Nor from a foreigner’s hand
Shall you offer any of these as the bread of your God
Because their corruption is in them, and defects are in them
They shall not be accepted on your behalf
———-In this there can be no approval nod

And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying:
These continued words He was then relaying

“When a bull or a sheep or a goat is born
It shall be seven days with its mother, according to this word
And from the eighth day and thereafter
It shall be accepted as an offering made by fire to the Lord 

Whether it is a cow or ewe, as to you I say
Do not kill both her and her young on the same day

And when you offer a sacrifice of thanksgiving to the Lord
Offer it of your own free will, heed now this word
On the same day it shall be eaten
You shall leave none of it until morning: I am the Lord

“Therefore you shall keep My commandments
And perform them: I am the Lord, so to you I do these things tell
You shall not profane My holy name
But I will be hallowed among the children of Israel

I am the Lord who sanctifies you
Who brought you out of the land of Egypt, to be your God
I am the Lord
Therefore walk circumspectly as before Me you trod

Lord God, You have sanctified us
And so now help us to sanctify ourselves as well
To ever emulate Jesus
Yes, our hearts we ask that You so impel

May we walk in a manner honorable and right
Never deviating from this noble way
May Christ Jesus be our ever-guiding Light
May He lead us in the bright, eternal day

And we give glory to You in the highest
Yes our voices raised
We bless Your glorious name
And forever it shall be praised

Hallelujah and Amen…

Leviticus 21:1-24
Suitable for the Priesthood

When I was a kid, mom and dad would take us up to Massachusetts every year for a summer vacation. It is a beautiful spot out in the remote western mountains, and has the smallest township in the state person-wise, but it is spread out over many miles of beautiful forests, hills, and mountains.

Right in the center of the town, the very heart of it, is where the church is. It’s only open for a couple months each summer, and it hires the summer preacher from elsewhere. One year, they hired a person who really wanted to preach. He had the heart and the desire to do so. You had to know this was the truth, because he also had the single worst stststststsutter that I, or anyone else in attendance, had ever heard. It was literally painful to listen to.

He would get stststststuck on a T, and it would grow to the point where his face would literally contort. And it wasn’t an occasional ststststststick. It happened constantly. Everyone knew the word he was trying to say, and certainly everyone wanted to simply yell it out and get on with the ever-lengthening sermon. Would we have the 2 pm baseball game at Austin farm? There’s only 2 hours left and he’s only done 10 sentences. The sermon is 25 pages. Baseball? We may not make it to dinner… or breakfast tomorrow.

It really was brutal, but people were polite. Needless to say, he didn’t get a re-invite the following year. It may have been better if everyone made light of it and actually yelled out the word he was t t t t t t t t trying to say. Maybe it would have helped him if we participated. Maybe not. There may have been a filled noose at the parsonage the next morning. It’s hard to say, but it was a sad and heartbreaking thing. I think about him often. He really wanted to do what he was wholly unsuited to do.

I feel that way as well. I think I can type a good sermon, but I know my delivery is not Joel Osteen quality – something I’m actually grateful for. We have a small church filled with the best people. I would miss that if I were eloquent and famous. But Sunday afternoon video editing makes me grateful for several things. I am grateful for cut and move, and I am grateful for morph cut. Cut and move means that I simply cut out my blunders. Morph cut means that I can morph the two images into one so that nobody can tell there was cut and move.

Watching, or listening to, one of my edited versions, you might think, “He’s not that bad.” The folks in attendance know otherwise, and for their patience, I am weekly grateful. But this poor guy’s sermons could never have been edited. There would have been nothing left after editing.

Text Verse: “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, ⁴ just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, ⁵ having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, ⁶ to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He made us accepted in the Beloved.” Ephesians 1:3-6

In Christ, we are accepted. This doesn’t mean that we all are perfect. And it doesn’t mean that we are all qualified to do anything we wish. As much as my heart breaks for that guy in the little church on the mountain, he wasn’t qualified to preach. It’s not that he was unqualified because his defect was unacceptable to God. It is that he was not acceptable to the ears of his audience. If he was a sound follower of the Lord, I can assure you that the Lord was well-pleased with his faith to try.

I’m grateful for this as well. I don’t need to be a Joel Osteen or an Adrian Rodgers. And a large church would mean I didn’t have the blessed relationship I have with those in a small church. He has fitted all things according to His wisdom. When that wisdom coincides with our desires, that is the sweet spot. And that is the spot I feel I’m in every single morning when I wake up.

Be sure that if you are in Christ, the Lord has accepted you, even if others don’t. There is only favor streaming from Him because of who you are. That’s the blessing of being a follower of Jesus. It is the message of Scripture. Today we will look back on what it was like before His coming, and we will look at why it was that way. It’s all to be found in His superior word. And so let’s turn to that precious word once again and… May God speak to us through His word today and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. Priestly Moral Restrictions (verses 1-9)

And the Lord said to Moses,

The opening words are different than are normally given. Usually it says, “And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying…” Here it says, “And the Lord said to Moses.” The Hebrew words for “spoke” and “said” carry essentially the same thought of conveying a message, but spoke is more concise. One commentary on the difference says, “You choose DABER if you only need to tell people what to do, but AMAR if the task is so complex that it requires a partnership and people working together.” And again, the same word follows in the next words…

^{1  (con’t)} “Speak to the priests, the sons of Aaron, and say to them: ‘None shall defile himself for the dead among his people,

The Lord uses the same word, amar, directing Moses to “‘Say’ to the priests, the sons of Aaron, and say to them.” He twice repeats the same word. But, the phrase He uses is unique to the five books of Moses. Six other times it says, “the sons of Aaron the priests.” Only here it reverses that and says, “the priests, the sons of Aaron.”

This rewording of the phrase is intended to relay the truth that they are priests because they are sons of Aaron, and not because of their own merit. Aaron was called by the Lord, and he did nothing to merit the call. As the book of Hebrews notes, there was no oath rendered in their priestly call, unlike Jesus who was made a Priest based on an oath recorded in the psalms. Like Aaron, who was called apart from any personal merit, this same thought transfers to all of his sons.

These words are to be conveyed to all of the priests who descend from Aaron. The instructions are given solely for them in this chapter. So far, the laws for holiness of the entire community have been given, and which pertained to all – both priest and layman. But, those who administer the law are set apart to the Lord in a unique way, and therefore additional requirements are to be laid upon them. The first, and thus chief requirement is that…

^{1  (con’t)} ‘None shall defile himself for the dead among his people,

The last chapter ended in a seemingly odd manner. It reintroduced the thought which said, “A man or a woman who is a medium, or who has familiar spirits, shall surely be put to death; they shall stone them with stones. Their blood shall be upon them.” As I said then, mediums and wizards were to be stoned because they infringed upon a realm which belongs to God alone.

People who practiced these things consulted the dead on behalf of the living. Instead of this, the people were to consult those who mediated the law on behalf of the people, meaning the priests. And the priests were to remain completely separate from the defilement of death. In this verse, the Hebrew does not say, “for the dead.” Instead, it reads, “for (a) soul do not be defiled.” The idea is that of a dead person however. When a soul leaves the body, you are mourning not for the body, but for the soul that has departed. The body without a soul is defiled, and it will transmit that defilement.

No priest was to touch a dead body, enter the house where a dead person was, help prepare or carry a dead body, etc. Such things defiled a person, and they became unclean for seven days, which then required certain rites of purification for their uncleanness. The reason for this, above all, is that death is the result of sin. It is the greatest penalty for sin, and it is the final identifying mark that a person bore sin. The law has already said that the man who does the things of the law will live by them. Each death was another testimony to the fact that no person had done the things of the law, and they suffered the just consequences of their failure.

In death, the mortal body began its rapid process of corruption and decay. This sign of the fallen world was a defiling marker for any who came in contact with it. Priests were expected to administer the law of life, at least life as far as the law could provide.

Every sacrifice that was detailed in the first half of Leviticus was an anticipatory type of death which foreshadowed the Person and work of Christ. It is He who, as Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15, swallowed up death in victory. For the priests to be defiled by death, it would indicate that their mediation was tainted. Thus, they were to be prohibited from the same freedoms granted to the lay people. For them, however, gracious exceptions were made…

² except for his relatives who are nearest to him: his mother, his father, his son, his daughter, and his brother;

The scholar Keil says that, “in the case of death among members of the family or household, defilement was not to be avoided on the part of the priest as the head of the family.” This is an insufficient explanation. No exception is given if a slave died in a house, which would by default render someone unclean, but that would have been just as unavoidable. This defilement due to a near relative is obviously given out of God’s kindness to the priest’s humanity.

It should be noted that this is second of only three times in the Bible where the mother is mentioned before the father. Several reasons probably exist for this subtle change. The first is the extremely close bond between a child and the mother. This would go hand in hand then with the already seen kind nature of God towards the priest’s humanity.

It extends even to the thought of Christ on the cross who took the time to care for the mother who bore Him before giving up His breath. Secondly, as the son’s qualifications for the priesthood depend on his mother’s character as will be seen in verse 7, the mother is identified before the father, who by his nature as a priest makes the child qualified for the priesthood as well.

This again points to Christ whose mother had necessary qualifications which needed to be highlighted in order for Him to qualify as our High Priest. Chief among them, He needed to be born of a virgin. Further, as Christ’s human father was via adoption, there is a distance there which brings the nearness of Mary closer to Him than Joseph. In the end, naming the mother first subtly looks forward to Christ as much as anything else. In all of the mentioned family members, their is a nearness considered in these exceptions. It allowed the priest to mourn over his dead close relatives. It is a nearness which extends to a certain point, however, and no more…

³ also his virgin sister who is near to him, who has had no husband, for her he may defile himself.

When a woman of Israel married, she went to her husband as one flesh, and she ceased being united in the unique family relationship that she once stood. Until that occurred, when she was a virgin near to him, he could defile himself for her, but upon her marriage, this right and honor ended. At that time, the husband was responsible for her funeral and tending to her internment.

⁴ Otherwise he shall not defile himself, being a chief man among his people, to profane himself.

This is a highly debated, and wholly confusing verse in the Hebrew. However, before reading what the Hebrew says, who is it that has been markedly left out of the list of people a priest can defile himself for? The wife. Here, the Hebrew reads, lo yitama baal b’amav l’he-khalow. No shall defile husband in his people to profane himself. “To profane himself” gives the sense of “with respect to a marriage by which he profanes himself.”

The implicit reading of this is that a husband is not to defile himself for his wife. Scholars disagree, saying it is obvious that as she is nearest to him of his close relatives, she is by default included. There is nothing obvious about that. The fact that the wife is not mentioned in the list completely negates that.

Scholars also say that Ezekiel was specifically told to not mourn his wife, thus implying that the normal thing to do was to mourn for a dead wife. But mourning and defilement are not the same thing. And so that can be tossed out. What is obvious is that the word baal, or husband, is used, and it is in conjunction with three verses which specifically leave the wife out.

One would ask though, “Why is a priest not permitted to defile himself for his own wife?” The only answer which makes any sense is that in the death of his wife, he has profaned himself already. According to Genesis 2:24, the man and the woman become one flesh when they married. Therefore, there is a state of profanation which exists because of her death, and it is not to be further exacerbated by his defiling himself for her soul.

And doesn’t this look forward to Christ and the church? When a soul departs, there is death, but in Christ, there is no defilement. As we noted earlier, death is swallowed up in victory. But Christ had to first profane Himself, taking on our sins, in order for that defilement to be cleansed. He became unclean so that we might be clean. The priest in type is looking forward to Christ because he was not to defile himself for his wife. Nor does Christ now defile Himself for us. Cleansing occurred at the cross, and there is now no defilement because of this.

⁵ ‘They shall not make any bald place on their heads, nor shall they shave the edges of their beards nor make any cuttings in their flesh.

This verse is referring to other nations ways of expressing grief which were seen when someone died. Verse 19:28 has already warned against these things for the lay people, and it now explicitly extends to the priests. It is certain that this is speaking of mourning for the dead, because in Deuteronomy 14:1, the prohibition is repeated with the words, “for the dead.” These things are comparable to today’s customs of wearing black, and so on. The priests were not to change their appearance in such outward signs of mourning, because they were holy unto the Lord, and were to reflect His glory at all times.

⁶ They shall be holy to their God and not profane the name of their God,

This explains the reason for the prohibitions given so far. The priests were to be holy, as the Lord is holy. In defiling themselves in these various ways, they would otherwise profane His name. The name which is then explicitly stated…

^6 (con’t) for they offer the offerings of the Lord made by fire, and the bread of their God; therefore they shall be holy.

The Lord, Yehovah, is their God. It is to Him that their fire-offerings were made. These are then explained as the “bread” or “food” of their God. The word “and” doesn’t belong here. The fire-offerings stand as representative of all of the offerings to the Lord. It is because they make these offerings, all pointing to Christ, that they were to be holy, and to not deviate from that state.

⁷ They shall not take a wife who is a harlot or a defiled woman, nor shall they take a woman divorced from her husband; for the priest is holy to his God.

The rules now go from contact and mourning for the dead which defiles, to contact with the living which could do the same. A woman who was a prostitute, even if she was reclaimed, could not become the wife of a priest. A defiled woman would be one who had lost her virginity, which in Israel would already be improper. But a priest could marry a woman not of Israel, and so this prohibition is stated so that it is understood that even if a foreigner, she was not to have been defiled. A priest was also not to marry a divorced woman. Any of these would demonstrate an unholiness which was incompatible with his position as a priest of God.

⁸ Therefore you shall consecrate him, for he offers the bread of your God. He shall be holy to you, for I the Lord, who sanctify you, am holy.

Verse 1 said, “Speak to the priests, the sons of Aaron.” It appears that this is what is being referred to here. Each priest was to hold every other priest accountable for their marriages. They were to ensure that no such illegal marriage was to take place, because he, along with each of them, offers “the bread of your God.” The priest then was to be holy, and they were to be holy to one another. And the exacting reason is again given as it has been at other times. It is because Yehovah is the one who sanctifies them. They were to be holy because the Lord set them apart as holy.

⁹ The daughter of any priest, if she profanes herself by playing the harlot, she profanes her father. She shall be burned with fire.

There are no exceptions here that later Jewish traditions introduce. The words are clear and precise. If a priest’s daughter become a whore, the name of her father would be profaned. In profaning his name, the name of the Lord would be profaned. There was to be no leniency for such an act. However, there is dispute as to what being burned with fire means. Does it mean that she was to be first stoned and then burned? Or was she to be put on a heap of sticks and burned alive? It goes unstated here. Either way, she was toast.

I am the Lord who sanctifies you
Therefore you shall be holy as I am holy
To this precept you shall be true
You shall follow My word and emulate Me

You shall not profane the name of your God
You shall not defile yourselves before Me
You shall walk circumspectly on the path you trod
You shall be holy for I am holy

I have redeemed you from your past, a life of sin
I have called you unto holiness, yes, to be holy
You were destined for hell, you were all but done in
And I saved you; now you shall follow after Me

II. Requirements of the High Priest (verses 10-15)

¹⁰ ‘He who is the high priest among his brethren, on whose head the anointing oil was poured and who is consecrated to wear the garments, shall not uncover his head nor tear his clothes;

This is the first use of ha’kohen ha’gadol, or “the priest, the great one.” He is distinguished by the office of high priest. This is explicitly noted in mentioning the anointing oil which was poured on him, and who alone was allowed to wear the garments of the high priest. These two things in particular distinguished him as Israel’s high priest.

First and foremost he is commanded to not uncover his head. Specifically, this means to allow his hair to be loosed, meaning unkempt. This was a sign of mourning, and he was never to demonstrate such an attitude. He was first, foremost, and always, to be holy to the Lord. Further, he was not to tear his clothes. To do so was an indication of distress or anguish. As the intercessor between the Lord and the people, his conduct in one of these ways would give either a sense of utter despair to the people, or that he was impugning the Lord’s fairness, justice, or ability to control any given situation. It is ironic that this first command to the high priest of Israel was openly disobeyed in the presence of the Lord who gave the command –

And the high priest arose and said to Him, “Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?” ⁶³ But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest answered and said to Him, “I put You under oath by the living God: Tell us if You are the Christ, the Son of God!”

⁶⁴ Jesus said to him, “It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

⁶⁵ Then the high priest tore his clothes, saying, “He has spoken blasphemy! What further need do we have of witnesses? Look, now you have heard His blasphemy! ⁶⁶ What do you think?” Matthew 26:62-66

Jesus was placed under oath by the high priest. Because of the position of the high priest, He was bound by the Law of Moses, which He gave to Israel, to tell the truth. He did, and therefore He remained without guilt in the matter. And yet, the high priest was guilty of violating a precept of the very law which he said Jesus was guilty of violating. There is an irony that runs through the Bible that is truly amazing when put in its proper light.

¹¹ nor shall he go near any dead body, nor defile himself for his father or his mother;

To go near a dead body means to enter a house or other area where a dead body was. He was not to come near any such dead person and thus contract defilement. The anointing oil on him was of more importance to keep free from defilement than even to defile himself for his own father or mother. His call to the office of high priest was one bestowed upon him by the Lord, and so to the Lord alone was his full, continuous, and pure devotion to be fixed.

¹² nor shall he go out of the sanctuary,

There is a dispute as to the meaning of “go out of the sanctuary.” Most scholars take this as “for the sake of a funeral, mourning, or some other sorrow or disaster which would take him from his duties.” Others say that he literally was never to leave the sanctuary because he was the high priest, and to the Lord, his life was dedicated. It seems more likely that this is speaking of going out of the sanctuary in abandonment of his duties in order to grieve, but that he was not restricted to the sanctuary at all times. This then would explain the next words…

^{12 (con’t)} nor profane the sanctuary of his God;

This means that if he were defiled at some point, he could not enter the sanctuary until his time of purification was complete. He could not enter the sanctuary if he had never left the sanctuary. And so it seems that the first clause is speaking of not all times, but at times referred to in the other verses. This is the more obvious when the high priest got married as all men do. In his marriage union, he would contract defilement according to the chapter on discharges. This would certainly not be something he would do while in the sanctuary. Therefore, it cannot be that the high priest was never to leave the sanctuary.

^{12 (con’t)} for the consecration of the anointing oil of his God is upon him: I am the Lord.

These words can be translated in two major ways. The first is that “the consecration of the anointing oil of his God is upon him.” Thus, the anointing oil is being used as representative of the high priestly office as it was in verse 10, along with his other garments. The second is “for crown, anointing oil is upon him.” The word used here, netser, is the same word used to describe the golden crown which adorned the high priest’s turban, and which also can mean “consecration.” Thus, both the crown and the oil are being used as representative of the office.

As the golden crown was engraved with the words Qadosh Yehovah, or “Holy (to) Yehovah” the final words of this verse, ani Yehovah, or I (am) Yehovah, seem to point to both being referred to. It is hard to be dogmatic, and no matter which, the office of high priest anticipates the greater office of Christ as High Priest, the oil of the anointing points to the prophetic influence of the Spirit resting upon Christ, and the crown points to Christ’s kingly status. Thus, He is our prophet, priest, and king.

¹³ And he shall take a wife in her virginity.

If the high priest were to marry a woman who was not a virgin, it would profane his seed. In this, he was a type of Christ to come. In 2 Corinthians 11, Paul writes the following –

“For I have betrothed you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.” 2 Corinthians 11:2

In each way, the type was to lead to the Antitype. He was to be an Old Testament example of the greater High Priest to come.

¹⁴ A widow or a divorced woman or a defiled woman or a harlot—these he shall not marry; but he shall take a virgin of his own people as wife.

These prohibitions are given against the words of the previous verse. You shall do this; you shall not do this. There was no room for reinterpreting the law in another way.

¹⁵ Nor shall he profane his posterity among his people, for I the Lord sanctify him.’”

What this means is that the high priest was not to enter into such a forbidden marriage because it would then render his children, born of such a union, ineligible for the privileges of the priesthood. The Lord had sanctified him, and he was to maintain that line of sanctity through holy offspring.

However… in Christ’s line women of these categories are seen, such as Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba, among others. Thus, the regulations here are symbolic only. True defilement doesn’t occur from such unions. It is the picture of Christ being betrothed to the chaste virgin to which these verses point. In the end, regardless of one’s genealogy, all defilement ceases in Christ. This is even true with the first high priest who had to be sanctified in order to enter the priestly line in the first place.

A High Priest, perfect in all ways
One who is consecrated to mediate for us
And He is qualified to do so for eternal days
He is our Lord; He is the Lord Jesus

Unto Himself a spotless bride He has taken
A chaste virgin beautiful and pure
Someday our departure we will be a’makin’
Until then, we patiently endure

But soon we shall be off to the sanctuary of God
For now, we await the time when unto Him we go
But our feet are ready, with the gospel we are shod
As we direct others on the correct path to follow

III. Defects Among the Priests (verses 16-24)

¹⁶ And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying,

We now return to the usual means of address where the Lord speaks (daber) to the people. In the previous section, the people were to do something in conjunction with the word of the Lord in order to not become defiled. Here, the people are designated as defiled by the word of the Lord. They need do nothing to be so; it is simply the way it is.

¹⁷ “Speak to Aaron, saying: ‘No man of your descendants in succeeding generations, who has any defect, may approach to offer the bread of his God.

If the sacrifices which were offered to the Lord were to be without blemish, how much more should those who make them be without defect! The word mum, or defect, is now introduced. Most of the 21 times it is seen will be in the books of Moses. It indicates a blemish which can be either physical or moral.

The spiritual nature of the sacrifices looked to the Person and work of Christ. The same is true with the spiritual nature of the priests. This was seen in exacting detail in the description of their garments, and in their ordination. These words now continue to expand on that thought.

Throughout the time of the Aaronic priesthood, any who was otherwise qualified to serve, but then who showed a defect as named here, would thus be deemed as unacceptable to serve. The entire time of the law, the people were being shown only types and shadows of Christ to come. Thus, until He came, the same standards and expectations were required in their priests as would be seen in the true Priest. This is the lesson here in order for Israel to understand the holiness of the Lord.

¹⁸ For any man who has a defect shall not approach: a man blind or lame, who has a marred face or any limb too long,

These words now begin to list what “defect” of the previous verse means. One who is ivver, or blind, was disqualified. The word comes from the word or, or skin. It is as if skin is pulled over the eye, causing it to not see. Such would be disqualified. Next is the pisseakh, or lame. The word is introduced here and it comes from a primitive root meaning “to hop.” One who is lame will appear to make small hops to correct his defect. Such was disqualified to minister before the Lord.

The kharam, or marred, was also disqualified. The word is used to indicate a city to be dedicated to God through destruction. Thus, it would be a flattened nose, a destroyed face, mutilated ear, etc. These such appearances disqualified their making offerings to the Lord. And then is noted the sara, or deformed. This word is seen for the first of but three times. It means, “to extend,” or “stretch out.” Thus it is anything superfluous or deformed. It would certainly include things like extra fingers and toes, long arms, etc.

¹⁹ a man who has a broken foot or broken hand,

Included also were those with the foot or hand which was broken. The word is shever, and it indicates a break, a fracture, a crushing, etc. In ancient times, when someone broke a bone, it would often mean he would be deformed permanently. And so whether born this way, or he became this way, the defect rendered him unsuitable to minister before Yehovah. Although not a priest, one such person was Saul’s son. He was broken in this manner as a child and remained lame throughout his life. That is recorded in 2 Samuel 4 –

“Jonathan, Saul’s son, had a son who was lame in his feet. He was five years old when the news about Saul and Jonathan came from Jezreel; and his nurse took him up and fled. And it happened, as she made haste to flee, that he fell and became lame. His name was Mephibosheth.” 2 Samuel 4:4

²⁰ or is a hunchback or a dwarf, or a man who has a defect in his eye, or eczema or scab, or is a eunuch.

The gibben, or hunchback, is a word found only here. It is from an unused root meaning to be arched or contracted. And so it would indicate a hunchback, a crook-back, etc. However, another possibility is that this is speaking of an arch over the eyes, and thus a gnurl-browed person who resembles an ape. This is a minority opinion though.

After him is the daq, or dwarf. The word comes from daqaq, or crushed. By implication it is something small or thin; a very little thing. Next comes another unique word to the Bible the tebalul b’enow, or “defect in eye.” The word comes from a word meaning to mix or confuse. This is probably speaking of cataracts or some other confusion of colors within the eye which is defective.

Anyone with garav, or eczema, was out. This word is seen first here, and it will be seen only once more in Leviticus and once in Deuteronomy. It comes from a root meaning to scratch. Thus it is an itchy affliction of the skin. No itchy people may serve. Likewise, the yallepeth, or scab, renders a person unclean. It is an eruptive disease which will be seen here and in the next chapter, and then it will be history.

And lastly, the eunuch was excluded. The term is meroakh ashek. Both words are only found here. Together, they mean crushed stones, and thus testicles. The idea here is that any such defect would render a person unsuitable to minister to the Lord.

These verses have caused much consternation to people in the world, and questions abound on Christian Q&A sites as to why the Lord disqualified such people. The questions inevitably go on to ask if these things continue on today. The first has been answered by me already. These things were given to point us to the true and perfect High Priest, Christ Jesus. The second will be answered before we finish today. It should be noted though that even in the Old Testament, a perfect appearance was no indication of a perfect person. The same word, mum, or blemish, was used to describe Absalom, the son of David as being perfect in his appearance, having no blemish. And yet, he was a loser who ended by being buried beneath a pile of stones, signifying the loser life he led. Others with blemishes were decent people who found the Lord’s favor, such as the Ethiopian eunuch Ebed-Melech. That is recorded in Jeremiah 39:16-18 –

Go and speak to Ebed-Melech the Ethiopian, saying, ‘Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: “Behold, I will bring My words upon this city for adversity and not for good, and they shall be performed in that day before you. ¹⁷ But I will deliver you in that day,” says the Lord, “and you shall not be given into the hand of the men of whom you are afraid. ¹⁸ For I will surely deliver you, and you shall not fall by the sword; but your life shall be as a prize to you, because you have put your trust in Me,” says the Lord.’”

²¹ No man of the descendants of Aaron the priest, who has a defect, shall come near to offer the offerings made by fire to the Lord. He has a defect; he shall not come near to offer the bread of his God.

These words are given to supplement what has already been provided. Twelve named defects were given to outline the general state of who would be considered unacceptable to minister before the Lord. Those twelve were only representative, however, of any and all other defects not specifically mentioned. It is certain that a person missing a limb or an ear would be likewise unqualified. A deaf person would be unsuitable to minister, etc.

This verse is given to demonstrate this. Twelve is the number of perfection of government. In the priestly government, there was to be perfection, and so those twelve items were given to support this idea. Those who offered the bread of their God were to be perfect in type because the One they picture is perfect in reality.

However, the restrictions on these sons of Aaron were only for drawing near to make the offerings to the Lord. They were not forbidden from assisting in other things that the priests needed to accomplish. During second temple times, periodic examinations of all priests were made. If any had become disqualified, they could still perform these assistant duties. If any had become well, they could be reintroduced into the regular priesthood. But all still had the same right to receive the provisions of the priests…

²² He may eat the bread of his God, both the most holy and the holy;

All things given to the priests, both the most holy and the holy offerings, were acceptable for all of the priestly class, regardless of any defect. This is something that a priest who was defiled because of uncleanness could not do. And so even under the law, we see a difference between natural infirmities and moral defilement. The typology of Christ is what is important. The rewards for maintaining that typology were bestowed upon all. This included things like wave offerings, other sacrificial portions reserved for the priest, first-fruits, tithes, things laid under a ban, etc.

²³ only he shall not go near the veil or approach the altar, because he has a defect, lest he profane My sanctuaries; for I the Lord sanctify them.’”

To go near the veil means to perform the duties in the holy place where the table of showbread, menorah, and altar of incense was located. Each of these were serviced at specific intervals by the priests. To approach the altar means to assist in the sacrifices there, including the daily, and other regularly, scheduled sacrifices. For them to perform those duties would profane His sanctuaries. The word is plural to indicate that each was its own holy place, with its own typological significance as it points to Christ. For a defective person to serve there would then violate the typology.

*²⁴ And Moses told it to Aaron and his sons, and to all the children of Israel.

The words here are in fulfillment of those given in verse 1. But they go further. Not only were the words imparted to Aaron and his sons, but to all of the children of Israel. This is important, because it was to tell Israel that all people were to know how the priests were to conduct their affairs. There was not a code for the priests which they alone could manipulate. There was a set code that the people could see being adhered to, or being violated. The priestly class, in this sense at least, was not above the common people.

And this is true with the requirements for elders and deacons today. The church hierarchy does not decide who is qualified; God does. From there, the people have the right to see those qualifications being lived out in their leaders. How unlike the way the affairs of larger denominations are run today. How unlike Catholicism which secrets away perverts from public and congregational scrutiny.

Earlier, I noted that parts of this passage have caused consternation among people. This is both within, and without, the church. People who want to show how bad the God of the Bible is will come here and type up ridiculous commentaries on how God doesn’t accept people with defects. Confusion among Christians follows suit.

As to why the Lord required people with such defects to be excluded from making offerings, that was already answered. It was to maintain the typology in anticipation of Christ. As with the sacrifices, as with the furniture, utensils, conduct of the people, and so on, so it is with the physical infirmities of the people. As to whether these requirements are still in effect today, I will give you two different commentaries from two different, widely accepted, scholars, both of whom I cite from time to time. Listen to the difference between the two –

“Let no man say this is a part of the Mosaic law, and we are not bound by it. It is an eternal law, founded on reason, propriety, common sense, and absolute necessity. The priest, the prophet, the Christian minister, is the representative of Jesus Christ; let nothing in his person, carriage, or doctrine, be unworthy of the personage he represents. A deformed person, though consummate in diplomatic wisdom, would never be employed as an ambassador by any enlightened court, if any fit person, unblemished, could possibly be procured.” Adam Clarke

“As these priests were types of Christ, so all ministers must be followers of him, that their example may teach others to imitate the Saviour. Without blemish, and separate from sinners, He executed his priestly office on earth. What manner of persons then should his ministers be! But all are, if Christians, spiritual priests; the minister especially is called to set a good example, that the people may follow it. Our bodily infirmities, blessed be God, cannot now shut us out from his service, from these privileges, or from his heavenly glory. Many a healthful, beautiful soul is lodged in a feeble, deformed body. And those who may not be suited for the work of the ministry, may serve God with comfort in other duties in his church.” Matthew Henry

Adam Clarke’s commentary could not be more flawed, both to the point of ridiculous, and disgusting. Further, it bears in it one of the most legalistic, unrealistic, and mishandled evaluations of Scripture that I have ever read. Moses had a defect of the tongue as did Paul. Paul had a physical infirmity which necessitated others to tend to him. Adam Clarke gets 1001 demerits for his perverse commentary.

The answer is that the law is annulled in Christ, in its entirety. He has arbitrarily picked and chosen selected portions of it for his own perverse view on that which is clearly not moral in nature. I have highlighted this several times in this passage alone. The reason for the prohibitions is typology. As the typology is fulfilled in Christ, then it is done. We cannot insert after-Christ’s ministry typology into what Christ has done as if it bears on what He did. Further, he uses the term “ambassador” when speaking of ministers. This is incorrect. The apostles were Christ’s ambassadors, and Paul – such an ambassador – had defects.

Our instructions for choosing elders and deacons in the Gentile-led church age is defined by Paul in the pastoral epistles written to Timothy and to Titus. Those letters define who can minister, and what their requirements are. We do not go back to a fulfilled, obsolete law to determine who can and cannot serve as a minister.

Beloved, if you are in Christ, God sees you without any flaws, without any defects, and without any sin. He sees you through the accomplished work of His Son, and when He does, He sees absolute perfection. Every spot is erased, every ding is filled in, every crack is smoothed over, and every misalignment is aligned. If you want to see how Christ sees His people, watch the music video on YouTube call Flawless, by Mercy Me. They do a great job of it.

This does not mean that we do not have expectations for our chosen men who minister before the Lord, but they are not physical, bodily expectations. They are moral guidelines and precepts which reflect the already-finished work of Christ.

This is what we need to remember when we come to difficult passages like this. Inevitably, someone is bound to ask you about hard concepts like our last verses of the day. We can absolutely blow it like Adam Clarke did, or we can see the grace… in Christ’s face, and we can be ready to share that message everywhere and everyplace. We are accepted because of Jesus. That is, if we belong to Jesus. If you don’t let’s get that settled today.

Closing Verse: “Go, eat your bread with joy,
And drink your wine with a merry heart;
For God has already accepted your works.” Ecclesiastes 9:7

Next Week: Leviticus 22:1-33 In attending during this sermon, you will not be bored… (I am the Lord) (35^th Leviticus Sermon)

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. Even if you have a lifetime of sin heaped up behind you, He can wash it away and purify you completely and wholly. So follow Him and trust Him and He will do marvelous things for you and through you.

Suitable for the Priesthood

And the Lord said to Moses
“Speak to the priests, the sons of Aaron what I have said
And say to them:
‘None shall defile himself among his people for the dead 

Except for his relatives who are nearest to him
His mother, his father, his son, his daughter, and his brother
Also his virgin sister who is near to him
Who has had no husband, for her he may defile himself
———-but for no other 

Otherwise he shall not defile himself, as I say
Being a chief man among his people, to profane himself in any way

‘They shall not make any bald place on their heads
Nor shall they shave the edges of their beards also
Nor make any cuttings in their flesh
These are prohibited as you now know

They shall be holy to their God
And not profane the name of their God, this shall never be
For they offer the offerings of the Lord made by fire
And the bread of their God; therefore they shall be holy

They shall not take a wife who is a harlot
Or a defiled woman, this thing shall not be
Nor shall they take a woman divorced from her husband
For the priest to his God is holy

Therefore you shall consecrate him
For he offers the bread of your God; these offerings to Me
He shall be holy to you
For I the Lord, who sanctify you, am holy

The daughter of any priest
If she profanes herself by playing the harlot
———-morality she has spurned
She profanes her father
She shall with fire be burned

‘He who is the high priest among his brethren
On whose head the anointing oil was poured
———-such as everyone knows
And who is consecrated to wear the garments
Shall not uncover his head nor tear his clothes

Nor shall he go near any dead body
Nor defile himself for his father or his mother too
Nor shall he go out of the sanctuary
Nor profane the sanctuary of his God, as I now instruct you

For upon him is the consecration of the anointing oil of his God
I am the Lord; circumspectly he shall trod

And he shall take a wife in her virginity
A widow or a divorced woman or a defiled woman or a harlot too
These he shall not marry
But he shall take a virgin of his own people as wife, so he shall do

Nor shall he profane among his people his posterity
For I the Lord sanctify him, and so this is how it shall be

And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying
These words to Him He was relaying

“Speak to Aaron, saying:
‘No man of your descendants in succeeding generations
Who has any defect, may approach to offer the bread of his God
No, even of his closest relations

For any man who has a defect shall not approach:
A man blind or lame, who has a marred face or any limb too long
A man who has a broken foot or broken hand
Or is a hunchback or a dwarf; when such with him is wrong

Or a man who has a defect in his eye
Or eczema or scab, or is a eunuch – they shall not apply

No man of the descendants of Aaron the priest
Who has a defect, shall come near to offer
The offerings made by fire to the Lord
He has a defect; no such thing shall he proffer

He shall not come near to offer the bread of his God
He may eat the bread of his God without reproach
Both the most holy and the holy
Only he shall not go near the veil or the altar approach

Because he has a defect
Lest My sanctuaries he profane
For I the Lord sanctify them
And so from these duties he shall abstain

And Moses told it to Aaron and his sons as well
And to all the children of Israel

Lord, in You is found the perfect High Priest
And because of You, we are accepted before God
From the greatest of us, even to the least
To Your greatness, we shout and applaud

As a kingdom of priests, we shall minister before You
And it shall be so even for eternal days
Offering worthy sacrifices, from hearts proven and true
Yes, before Your throne, we shall give You eternal praise

Glory to God in the highest; glory to our King
Glory to God in the highest; hear our voices sing

Hallelujah and Amen…

Leviticus 20:1-27
In These, Israel Will be Judged

When we get down to verse 22, we will once again read of the promise to Israel that they would enter and possess the land of Canaan. It would be theirs as an inheritance. It is a great promise, but it is one which is both conditional and unconditional, depending on certain things. That will be seen when we get to those verses. The nature of the promise is based on the law. That has been seen, it will be seen today, and it will continue to be seen.

But, there is a greater inheritance for us which is not based on the law. And it is a promise which actually predates the law itself. Paul speaks of it several times in his writings. In the book of Romans, he speaks of it quite a bit. If it is not based on the law though, then what is it based on? He tells us in our text verse of the day…

Text Verse: “For the promise that he would be the heir of the world was not to Abraham or to his seed through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. ¹⁴ For if those who are of the law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise made of no effect, ¹⁵ because the law brings about wrath; for where there is no law there is no transgression.” Romans 4:13-15

Paul, under inspiration of the Holy Spirit, clearly tells us that the law brings about wrath. Who wants that? What kind of perverse individual would set aside faith in Christ’s fulfillment of the law in order to face God’s wrath? Well, there are lots of them out there.

And I’m not talking about Jews who have simply rejected Christ outright. I’m referring to supposed Christians who have accepted Him in His Person, but rejected Him in His action. Unfortunately, one cannot separate a person from his actions. Just as David said to Saul, “Wickedness proceeds from the wicked,” so righteousness proceeds from the Righteous. What Christ did was righteous. And from Him proceeds righteousness.

When one receives Christ and what He did, they receive His righteousness. To reject what He did is to reject what He is. Paul says that if those who are of the law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise made of no effect. We can either live by faith in Christ – all of Christ, meaning all of what He has done for us, or we can attempt to earn God’s favor and obtain the inheritance apart from Him. There are no other options. Israel found out that obtaining the inheritance was not so easy. In fact, they still don’t have it. It is the constant and firm message of the Bible.

We can honor the Lord as He determines, and thus be pleasing to God, or we can set about to obtain righteousness on our own. But the Lord has determined – it is by faith in Christ Jesus and His work that we stand justified. It is by deeds of the law that we stand condemned. Do you want the promised inheritance? Then trust in Jesus. This is the message which is found once again in today’s passage. It is the lesson of His superior word. And so let’s turn to that precious word once again and… May God speak to us through His word today and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. Dishonoring the Lord as Father (verses 1-9)

Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying,

Like the words of Chapters 18 & 19, words of law lie ahead, and so the Lord speaks directly and only to Moses. Whereas the previous chapters gave moral and ceremonial laws for holy conduct towards God and fellow man, these verses will explain the penalties for violating such laws. The Lord is slowly and methodically revealing to Israel His will, and consequences for disobedience to that will.

Chapter 18, after listing many of the perversions which were to be abstained from, said that it was for these things that the occupants of the land would be vomited out. He then said that any of Israel who committed these things would be cut off from among their people. Chapter 19 continued with prescribing laws for the people. Now, the specific punishments for violations will be given. This is to keep the land undefiled. If these judgments are not followed, the implication is that land would likewise vomit Israel out.

² “Again, you shall say to the children of Israel:

The words given are for the whole congregation. They are to be commonly known and adhered to by all. The only way such laws could be expected to be obeyed is if all of the people heard them. The precepts laid down were to be commonly held knowledge, and the penalties for violating them were to be made known. In this, there was to be instilled in the people the fear of consequence for failing to be obedient to the precepts.

^2 (con’t) ‘Whoever of the children of Israel, or of the strangers who dwell in Israel, who gives any of his descendants to Molech, he shall surely be put to death.

In Chapter 18, the laws of incest were mentioned first, and in detail. Only then was the prohibition against giving one’s descendants to Molech addressed. Now that is reversed, and the prohibition concerning Molech is stated first.

As was the case in Chapter 18, the Hebrew word for “descendant” here is zara, it simply means “seed.” This may actually be referring to child sacrifice as will be seen later in the Bible, but it very well may be speaking only of a perverse offering of intimacy to the idol Molech where the man’s semen is made an offering, either to a prostitute of Molech, or to the idol itself. As most of the chapter deals with sexual misconduct, this is not at all unlikely.

The seed of Israel was to be kept pure and holy. It was not to be used for defiled purposes, and the intent of the people was to lead to Messiah, if the people offered their seed – literal, or in the form of children – it was a direct challenge to the redemptive purposes of the Lord for bringing Messiah into the world. And so, regardless as to what the offering is, the person was to be put to death.

^2 (con’t) The people of the land shall stone him with stones.

Not only was the person to be put to death, but the Lord determines the exact type of death he was to suffer, that of stoning. In this verse is the first use of the verb ragam, or stoning, in the Bible. The act of stoning has already been mentioned eight times in Exodus, but using a different word, saqal. The two are actually synonyms, and both are used in one verse in Joshua, for example, to convey the same meaning –

And Joshua said, “Why have you troubled us? The Lord will trouble you this day.” So all Israel stoned (ragam) him with stones; and they burned them with fire after they had stoned (saqal) them with stones. Joshua 7:25

Stoning, or lapidation as it is known, was the most severe means of capital punishment among the people of Israel. It was something which carried on, even into New Testament times. It continues to be practiced by followers of Islam today. The idea of this type of punishment is that the person was no longer fit to touch. Instead, the people were to stand at a distance and destroy him ba’eben, or “by (a) stone,” The word is singular. Stone is created by God, thus this indicates that they were the instruments of God’s righteous judgment upon the offender.

³ I will set My face against that man, and will cut him off from his people,

The verse in the Hebrew begins with “And.” “And I will set my face…” It has already been said that he was to be put to death by stoning, and so this, at first, seems curious. But the next verses explain the matter. If the people refuse to stone him, or if there is not sufficient evidence in order to convict him, it will not in any way negate what is coming to him. The Lord promises that no matter what, 1) He will set His face against him, and 2) He will cut him off from his people.

For the Lord to set His face against someone is an indication of wrath and indignation. He will be the object of the Lord’s fury. This then will result in the person being cut off from his people.

^3 (con’t) because he has given some of his descendants to Molech, to defile My sanctuary and profane My holy name.

There are three main reasons for cutting him off. The first is that he has cut himself off through his act. He has taken his seed and offered it to a false god. This has essentially been a willful cutting off of himself from both the Lord, and from posterity within the Lord’s covenant people.

Secondly, he has defiled the Lord’s sanctuary. Through sin, the people contracted defilement. In turn, they defiled the sanctuary of the Lord which remained in the midst of them. This was seen, for example, in Leviticus 15:31 concerning uncleanness from discharges. There the Lord said, “Thus you shall separate the children of Israel from their uncleanness, lest they die in their uncleanness when they defile My tabernacle that is among them.” He repeats this same sentiment in Leviticus 16 as well.

Thirdly, the offender would profane the Lord’s holy name. This would occur in several ways, first, by acknowledging a lessor god, it would diminish the name of the Lord in the eyes of other nations, having reduced Him to the level of any false god. It would also diminish His name because the man offered his own seed to a false god, but only animal sacrifices to the Lord. Thus in other’s eyes, the greater offering was made to the false god. In this, the name of the Lord would be despised by the man, and disgraced in the eyes of others.

⁴ And if the people of the land should in any way hide their eyes from the man, when he gives some of his descendants to Molech, and they do not kill him,

There is a stress in the Hebrew here where the word “hide” is repeated. In essence, it says, “And if in hiding, the people hide their eyes.” It is a way of saying that the people have willingly shut their eyes to what this man has done.

In this, they may know what he did and refuse to acknowledge it, or if they simply look away from it as if it was his own business, or if they will not bear witness against him, or if the court will not find guilt in him for his action, or for any other such reason, they will have failed to act. Instead of executing him, they allow him to live. If such be the case…

⁵ then I will set My face against that man and against his family; and I will cut him off from his people, and all who prostitute themselves with him to commit harlotry with Molech.

When the people hide their eyes from the thing that has been done by such a man, all involved will suffer the wrath of the Lord. He will set His face against him as the offender, against his family who was aware of his actions, and he will cut off every person who was aware of, but unwilling to respond against, his actions. In this, the Lord says they have prostituted themselves and committed harlotry. This is to be taken in the general, biblical sense of idolatry with false gods being considered harlotry. In this case, it is with ha’molekh, or “the Molech,” that they have so acted.

The name Molech means “king.” By placing an article in front of it here, the Lord is essentially saying they are commuting harlotry with “the king.” They have willfully chosen another sovereign over themselves in place of the Lord. It is the greatest of offense.

In this harlotry to Molech, Israel failed. Several times. Solomon built a high place for Molech, and both 2 Kings 23 and Jeremiah 32 explicitly state that the people offered to Molech. It is also implicitly referred to in Ezekiel 23.

⁶ ‘And the person who turns to mediums and familiar spirits, to prostitute himself with them, I will set My face against that person and cut him off from his people.

This was first forbidden in 19:31. There the Lord said to give them no regard nor seek after them. By doing so, they would become defiled. Here, the punishment is stated as coming from the Lord. He would personally act against anyone who failed to obey this precept. A record of Him doing just this is found in 1 Chronicles 10. King Saul had sought out a medium, and the Lord acted –

“So Saul died for his unfaithfulness which he had committed against the Lord, because he did not keep the word of the Lord, and also because he consulted a medium for guidance. ¹⁴ But he did not inquire of the Lord; therefore He killed him, and turned the kingdom over to David the son of Jesse.” 1 Chronicles 10:13, 14

⁷ Consecrate yourselves therefore, and be holy, for I am the Lord your God.

This is a positive command in order to battle against the need for negative ones. This is the purpose of the entire passage. The people were to stay clear of that which was unclean, morally offensive, and which would profane the name of the Lord as well as defile His sanctuary. This could only come about by refraining from such sin, punishing such sin in those who did not comply, or by purification through the sacrificial system when allowed.

 ⁸ And you shall keep My statutes, and perform them:

The words here point not just to the statutes so far mentioned, but to all of those which had and would issue from Him. They were to both keep and perform. One can keep without performing, such as in the person who knows to do right, but doesn’t do it. One can also perform without keeping. Such would be the person who does what is right without having considered it as right or not. He simply acted, and his actions were proper. The Lord wanted a wholeness in the people where they would mentally carry His statutes with them, and also perform what they carried in their minds.

 ^{8  (con’t)} I am the Lord who sanctifies you.

This is one of three times that the Lord states this in the Pentateuch. He also repeats it in Ezekiel 20. The Lord told the people to sanctify themselves because He had, in fact sanctified them. There is a mutual outworking of the sanctification which needed to occur. If they failed to do this, the Lord’s sanctification of them was nullified in them.

⁹ ‘For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother. His blood shall be upon him.

The verse begins with the word ki, or “for.” Therefore, it is being uniquely tied in with what was just said. To curse father or mother is to bring discredit upon the name of the Lord who ordained the genealogy of the child.

In the previous chapter, the opposite of what we see here was stated. There it said, “Every one of you shall revere his mother and his father.” Now it uses the word qalal. It means “curse,” but it also carries the sense of making light of something. Thus it includes speaking disrespectfully, or diminishingly of one’s parents. It is the polar opposite of revering them.

Further, unlike verse 19:3, where the mother was placed first, here the father is. It is a clear indication that the Lord expects equal reverence for both parents, and to do verbal harm to them is a punishable offense. In this, it says that, “His blood shall be upon him.” In Exodus 21:17, it explicitly says that he who cursed his father or his mother was to be put to death. The words here, “his blood shall be upon him,” signify that. He is guilty of death, and that is what he is to receive.

Lord, You are as a Father to us, it is true
But we often dishonor You in thought and act
In the things we think, and say, and do
We diminish Your glory, by showing no tact

Help us to be pleasing children in Your sight
Correct us when we walk in the wrong way
Illuminate our path with Your guiding light
And keep us, O Lord, from ever going astray

Lord, You are as a Father to us, it is true
And it is our heart’s desire to honor You as such
To live holy in all we think, and say, and do
And so when we stray, send Your corrective touch

II. Dishonoring the Lord through relations (verses 10-21)

¹⁰ ‘The man who commits adultery with another man’s wife, he who commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress, shall surely be put to death.

This is the seventh of the Ten Commandments, and it is also explicitly warned against in verse 18:20. In Israel, this went only one way. When a man, single or married, slept with a married woman, both were to be put to death by stoning. However, as polygamy was allowed in Israel, the same was not true with an unmarried woman sleeping with a married man.

¹¹ The man who lies with his father’s wife has uncovered his father’s nakedness; both of them shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.

This was forbidden in 18:7, 8. For disobeying this, the penalty was death. Again, it says, “Their blood shall be upon them.” What they have done is deserving of death, and death is what they are expected to receive.

¹² If a man lies with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall surely be put to death. They have committed perversion. Their blood shall be upon them.

This was forbidden in 18:17. The act is described by a word, tebel, which was first seen in 18:23 in regards to bestiality. It means “mixture,”and thus “confusion.” In this act, there is a confusing of what is right and proper. The lines of propriety have been completely jumbled up through such an act, and thus their blood is upon them. This is the last use of tebel in Scripture, tata to it.

¹³ If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.

This was forbidden in 18:22, and it is considered as an especially revolting crime because it is contrary to nature itself. For such, there was to be but one penalty, death. Literally, “dying they shall die.” They were deserving of death, and they were to be executed.

¹⁴ If a man marries a woman and her mother, it is wickedness. They shall be burned with fire, both he and they, that there may be no wickedness among you.

This was warned against in 18:17. Here it is described as zimmah, or “wickedness.” It literally means “a plan,” and thus it is an especially bad one. The offenders devised something perverse, and for it they were to be burned with fire. What this most likely means is that they were to first be stoned, and then their bodies burned with fire. This is the penalty for Achan in Joshua 7:25. That account seems to interpret what this passage here means.

¹⁵ If a man mates with an animal, he shall surely be put to death, and you shall kill the animal.

Like the perverse sin of homosexuality, the same is true with bestiality. This was warned against in 18:23. If such a thing occurred, then dying he shall die, and the animal was to be killed as well. This held for both man and woman…

¹⁶ If a woman approaches any animal and mates with it, you shall kill the woman and the animal. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood is upon them.

There was no partiality or unfairness against one sex or the other. Just as if a man committed this perverse act, so it was with a woman. In the end, dying they shall die, and the beast was to be killed as well. In this, they were deserving of death, and the sentence was to be carried out.

¹⁷ ‘If a man takes his sister, his father’s daughter or his mother’s daughter, and sees her nakedness and she sees his nakedness, it is a wicked thing. And they shall be cut off in the sight of their people. He has uncovered his sister’s nakedness. He shall bear his guilt.

This was forbidden in 18:9 & 11. The second clause explains the first. To “see” his or her nakedness means to participate in the physical act of a union, not just to behold with the eyes. This is what King David’s son Amnon was guilty of, but nothing was immediately done about the crime. However, in the end, he was cut off from his people, just as is promised here when he was killed by his brother Absalom.

The act here is termed a khesed, or disgrace, and the one who is so engaged in it is said to bear his guilt. The term “cut off” is debated though. Does it mean formal excommunication, or does it mean death. Scholars are divided, but either way it is termed a disgrace.

¹⁸ If a man lies with a woman during her sickness and uncovers her nakedness, he has exposed her flow, and she has uncovered the flow of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from their people.

This was forbidden in 18:19. The command extends to both in the use of the two clauses – 1) He has exposed her flow, and 2) she has uncovered the flow of her blood. This indicates prior knowledge by both, and they have willfully violated the precept. The problem with this is that it is an intimate act, and so for the punishment of being cut off from the people to be brought about, they would have to openly admit the act.

¹⁹ ‘You shall not uncover the nakedness of your mother’s sister nor of your father’s sister, for that would uncover his near of kin. They shall bear their guilt.

This was expressly forbidden in 18:12, 13. No civil punishment is explicitly made for this offense. Instead, it simply says that they shall bear their guilt. It appears then that the Lord would determine what was suitable to the offense as He directed their lives according to His wisdom. Such is seen in the next verse…

²⁰ If a man lies with his uncle’s wife, he has uncovered his uncle’s nakedness. They shall bear their sin; they shall die childless.

This was spoken against in 18:14. The punishment given here, that they shall die childless, is one which could carry several meanings. It seems unlikely that the Lord would divinely intervene in every such marriage, keeping them from having children. It also seems unlikely that any children born to such a union would die before their parents, thus rendering them childless at their own death. What is more likely is that any child born to such a union would not be counted as the result of that union. Instead, it would – by law – be reckoned as the child of the uncle to whom she was first married. In this, the offending man would never have his own progeny after him, and the offending woman would bear the disgrace of having a child which was not reckoned to the natural father. Such seems more likely, and it follows through to the next verse…

²¹ If a man takes his brother’s wife, it is an unclean thing. He has uncovered his brother’s nakedness. They shall be childless.

This was prohibited in 18:16. The same penalty for the previous offense would be imposed here, bearing the same disgrace to the offenders. The explanation given seems all the more likely, because the only other times that ariri, or “childless,” is seen in Scripture are in Genesis 15:2, and Jeremiah 22:30, both of which carry the connotation of bearing shame at dying without progeny. The person mentioned in Jeremiah 22:30 actually did have children though.

Lord God, Your word is written, Old Testament and New
And the words are clear concerning sexual sin
There is intimacy we may enjoy, and other things we may not do
One will bring us life; by the other we are done in

But the lines are blurred, even in our church today
People call evil that which is right and good
And that which is perverse is given a resounding “It’s OK!”
How can something so clear be so hugely misunderstood?

Lord God, keep us from sexual immorality which does defile
Keep us on the narrow path where life and health is found
In paying heed to your word, we shall receive a welcome smile
And in Your presence joy and peace shall evermore abound

Lead us, O God, be near and watch over us
We come to You, O Father, through our Lord Jesus

III. Separation Unto the Lord (verses 22-27)

²² ‘You shall therefore keep all My statutes and all My judgments, and perform them, that the land where I am bringing you to dwell may not vomit you out.

This is what is known as a prosopopoeia. It is a figure of speech in which an abstract thing is personified. In this case, the land is so personified, indicating that the sins of the people would cause it to vomit the people out. This was to be the case with the current inhabitants, and Israel would not be immune from such a measure if they failed to pay heed to the statutes and judgments which were placed before them now.

In the end, the two exiles of Israel can only be ascribed to their own disobedience. The two returns of Israel must then be ascribed to the covenant faithfulness of the Lord, which is in accord with His mercy towards those He covenanted with. There is no merit in Israel in their return, and there is only blame in them for their exile.

²³ And you shall not walk in the statutes of the nation which I am casting out before you; for they commit all these things, and therefore I abhor them.

Although these words are a part of the Law of Moses, many of these are moral standards which are directed by the conscience. An obvious one is homosexuality. Paul speaks of this in Romans 1. In fact, this entire passage contains mandates which are generally considered normal in most societies. However, only through the giving of the law can sin be imputed. The natural workings of the world dictate that immorality be avoided, but once the law was introduced, a definite penalty for violating it could then be imposed. Paul explains this in Romans 5:12, 13 –

“Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned— ^13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.” 

The law now is defining what sin is, how to avoid it, and what its consequences are. As the law is now annulled in Christ, such sin is not imputed for those who are in Christ. This is the marvel of what God has done for us in Christ. Paul explains it in 2 Corinthians 5:18, 19 –

“Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation, ¹⁹ that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation.”

Instead of imputing our trespasses to us, God has reconciled us to Himself through Christ and His fulfillment of this law. That is what makes the next promise so marvelous for the Christian…

²⁴ But I have said to you, “You shall inherit their land, and I will give it to you to possess, a land flowing with milk and honey.”

God promised the land to Israel, but it is a both a conditional and an unconditional promise. It is unconditional in whose land it is, but it is conditional in how they may use it. “When you are obedient, the land is yours and you may dwell in it. When you are disobedient, the land is yours and you may not.” However, the land is theirs as an inheritance. But sometimes the inheritance wouldn’t be so great, because even the nature of the land was subject to the obedience of Israel.

This is the first, and only, time that the term “a land flowing with milk and honey” is used in Leviticus. A land flowing with milk and honey implies richness and fertility. Milk comes from cows and so it means there will be abundant pasture lands. Honey comes from bees which pollinate flowers and so it implies all sorts of fruit trees, herbs, and flowers.

Further the term “a land flowing with milk and honey” has a spiritual connotation. It isn’t just speaking of the physical abundance but also of spiritual abundance. It is the land of God’s word and the people through whom that word has come.

The word of God is said to be sweeter than honey. It is also equated with milk which nourishes. Thus, this is a reference to that as well. The land would literally flow with milk and honey for sustaining Israel’s physical lives. It would also flow with milk and honey for sustaining their spiritual lives.

In looking back on Israel, it is possible to see that both the physical and spiritual aspects of this verse have come about in the land. The Lord promises them abundance now, but later in Scripture, He promises that both of these – the physical and spiritual aspects – would be denied them for their disobedience. The conditional nature of the covenant is seen in this. And the reason is given…

^{24 (con’t)} I am the Lord your God, who has separated you from the peoples.

Yehovah their God had separated them from the peoples, and thus they were to separate themselves from the practices of the peoples. Should they fail to do this, they would be taught their lesson among the peoples. They would live in defiled lands, and among defiled people because they too had defiled themselves.

But, as I said a minute ago, what Christ has done for us, in fulfilling the law and in granting a new covenant, is far superior to what Israel was promised. We are free from the law, and thus free from sin’s penalty. God is not imputing sin to us because of our transgressions. And thus, our promised inheritance cannot be conditional. Rather the inheritance is eternal, and the mediation by Christ is superlative to that of Aaron –

“And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.” Hebrews 9:15.

²⁵ You shall therefore distinguish between clean animals and unclean, between unclean birds and clean, and you shall not make yourselves abominable by beast or by bird, or by any kind of living thing that creeps on the ground, which I have separated from you as unclean.

In the previous verse, the Lord used the word badal, or “separated,” by saying He has “separated you from the peoples.” Now the same word is used again to make a theological point. As we saw in the dietary laws, each unclean animal actually carried a spiritual meaning in the New Testament. It is not that they are actually unclean, but that they were being used as types and pictures of other things for our benefit. Paul explains to us that what is recorded in the Old is meant to teach us in the New.

The Lord has asked them to separate between clean and unclean animals to teach them that they have been separated as clean from the unclean peoples. The fulfillment of this lesson is recorded in Acts where Peter was told to eat exactly what is forbidden here in Leviticus. When he refused, the Lord told him, “What God has cleansed you must not call common or unclean.”

The dietary laws, like circumcision, and like Sabbath observance, were given as theological insights into what God would do for us in Christ. Now, our separation is a spiritual, not a physical one. We are separated unto God through Christ, not through adherence to an annulled system of laws. It’s rather difficult to see how people miss this, but it is a common, and growing, problem in the church today.

²⁶ And you shall be holy to Me, for I the Lord am holy, and have separated you from the peoples, that you should be Mine.

These words are a close repeat of those found in Leviticus 11:44, and they comprise what is essentially the central theme of the entire book. The Lord again says that he has badal, or “separated” Israel from the peoples, therefore, they were be holy as He is holy. It is the observance of the laws which could make this possible for them, but such was impossible.

The bracketing of the dietary laws, in particular, by these statements of separation show us rather clearly that those restrictions were to be markers of their separation. And the nullifying of them in Acts shows that the separation which is now found is far, far superior.

In Christ, it is faith in His fulfillment of the law which make this possible for us, and such is not only possible, it is accomplished. We are holy because He is holy. Now He asks us to be holy as He is holy. Our position will remain unchanged, but our current state is to be worked out for Him and for His glory in holiness.

*²⁷ ‘A man or a woman who is a medium, or who has familiar spirits, shall surely be put to death; they shall stone them with stones. Their blood shall be upon them.’”

It seems on the surface as an odd way to suddenly end the chapter, but it fits rather well when one considers the flow of what has been said. In 19:31, consulting such a person is forbidden. In verse 6 of this chapter, the penalty for consulting such a person was then given. However, now the penalty for performing as a medium or having a familiar spirit is expressly stated. Whether a man or a woman, dying they shall die.

Women are specifically mentioned here for a couple reasons. First, it has always been more common that women have acted in this capacity. This is seen throughout cultures and ages. Secondly, due to man’s tendency to provide clemency towards females, the Lord specifically directs that anyone, regardless of sex, was to die.

And this is to be accomplished “by (a) stone,” it is singular again. As noted before, stone is created by God, and thus Israel is to be the instrument of the Lord’s righteous judgment upon such offenders who would attempt to usurp these rights and roles which belong to the Lord alone.

And even in this, there is a lesson for us. As I just said, the mediums and wizards were to be stoned because they infringed upon a realm which belongs to God alone. But this is what each of us does when we attempt to merit God’s favor through deeds of the very law we are looking at.

In this, we infringe upon what Christ has done for us. We step into a realm of personal merit before God and say, “I am fully capable of accomplishing those things which will make me holy.” This is a place which is completely contrary to the New Covenant in Christ. It is He who makes man holy, because it is He who has fulfilled this law. Our righteousness is an imputed one, not one which is earned. To set that aside is to step into that terrible realm which belongs to Christ, and it is that Stone by which we shall die in our futile attempt at outdoing Him.

Let us never be found in such an unhappy position. Instead, let us hold fast to Christ, let us be holy because He is holy, and because He has made us holy. Our work is not for, but because of. If we can keep this distinction clear, we will be in the sweet spot. Let us rest in Christ, trust in Christ, and honor God through Christ. Thank God for Jesus Christ.

Closing Verse: “Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith. ²⁸ Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law. ²⁹ Or is He the God of the Jews only? Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also, ³⁰ since there is one God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. ³¹ Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law.” Romans 3:27-31

Next Week: Leviticus 21:1-24 My, Jedidiah! In those garments you sure look good… (Suitable for the Priesthood) (34^th Leviticus Sermon)

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. Even if you have a lifetime of sin heaped up behind you, He can wash it away and purify you completely and wholly. So follow Him and trust Him and He will do marvelous things for you and through you.

In These, Israel Will be Judged

Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying
These are the words He was then relaying

“Again, you shall say to the children of Israel:
These things to them you are to tell

‘Whoever of the children of Israel
Or of the strangers who dwell in Israel
Who gives any of his descendants to Molech
He shall surely be put to death, as to you I now tell

The people of the land shall stone him with stones
Toss good and hard and break those bones 

I will set My face against that man
And will cut him off from his people; he will bear the blame
Because he has given some of his descendants to Molech
To defile My sanctuary and profane My holy name

And if the people of the land
Should in any way hide their eyes from the man
When he gives some of his descendants to Molech
And they do not kill him, according to My plan

Then I will set My face against that man
And against his family; they shall be a wreck
And I will cut him off from his people
And all who prostitute themselves with him
———-to commit harlotry with Molech

‘And the person who turns to mediums and familiar spirits
To prostitute himself with them in this way
I will set My face against that person
And cut him off from his people; I shall perform what I say

Consecrate yourselves therefore, and be holy
For I am the Lord your God
These things you shall do
And you shall keep My statutes, and perform them:
———-I am the Lord who sanctifies you

‘For everyone who curses his father or his mother
Shall surely be put to death, it shall be so
He has cursed his father or his mother
His blood shall be upon him; to the pit he shall go

‘The man who commits adultery with another man’s wife
He who commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife
The adulterer and the adulteress
Shall surely be put to death; so shall end their cheating life

The man who lies with his father’s wife
Has uncovered his father’s nakedness
Both of them shall surely be put to death
Their blood shall be upon them, as to you I address

If a man lies with his daughter-in-law
Both of them shall surely be put to death, so I to you say
They have committed perversion
Their blood shall be upon them; such evil you shall put away

If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman
Both of them have committed an abomination
They shall surely be put to death
Their blood shall be upon them; you are to be a holy nation

If a man marries a woman and her mother
It is wickedness, so it is true
They shall be burned with fire
Both he and they, that there may be no wickedness among you

If a man mates with an animal
Pay heed to what I now tell
He shall surely be put to death
And you shall kill the animal as well

If a woman approaches any animal and mates with it
You shall kill the woman and the animal too
They shall surely be put to death
Their blood is upon them, as I am telling you

‘If a man takes his sister
His father’s daughter or his mother’s daughter as I am telling
And sees her nakedness and she sees his nakedness
It is a wicked thing

And they shall be cut off
In the sight of their people, so it shall be
He has uncovered his sister’s nakedness
He shall bear his guilt; abide by these laws from Me

If a man lies with a woman during her sickness
And uncovers her nakedness, he has exposed her flow
And she has uncovered the flow of her blood
Both of them shall be cut off from their people; you shall do so

‘You shall not uncover the nakedness
Of your mother’s sister nor of your father’s sister too
For that would uncover his near of kin
They shall bear their guilt, as I now say to you

If a man lies with his uncle’s wife
He has uncovered his uncle’s nakedness
They shall bear their sin
They shall die childless

If a man takes his brother’s wife
It is an unclean thing, you see
He has uncovered his brother’s nakedness
They shall be childless; pay heed to these words from Me

‘You shall therefore keep all My statutes and all My judgments
And perform them, no doubt
That the land where I am bringing you to dwell
May not vomit you out

And you shall not walk in the statutes
Of the nation which I am casting out before you
For they commit all these things
And therefore I abhor them through and through

But I have said to you
“You shall inherit their land; things will be sunny
And I will give it to you to possess
A land flowing with milk and honey

I am the Lord your God
Who has separated you from the peoples
———-in the land that you will trod

You shall therefore distinguish
Between clean animals and unclean, check the kosher label
Between unclean birds and clean
And you shall not make yourselves abominable

By beast or by bird
Or by any kind of living thing that creeps on the ground
Which I have separated from you as unclean
Eat only that which the law proclaims is sound

And you shall be holy to Me
For I the Lord am holy
And have separated you from the peoples
That you should be Mine, yes to belong unto Me

‘A man or a woman who is a medium
Or who has familiar spirits, shall be put to death surely
They shall stone them with stones
Their blood shall upon them be

Lord God, You have from among the nations called us
Not to live the law given so long ago
But to live by faith in the work of Christ Jesus
And on the straight path of faith, we shall go

Our hope is found in Him alone
We will not look to our own righteousness
From the law like children into sons we have grown
And so in Christ we shall praise You, and Your name we shall bless

Only in Him can we find peace with You
Only in Him are we counted as holy in Your eyes
Thank You for Christ, ever faithful and true
Thank You for Christ, our heavenly prize

Hallelujah and Amen…