THE BURNT OFFERING
(CONCLUDED)
Lev 1:5-17; Lev 6:8-13
AFTER the laying on of the hand, the next sacrificial act was-
THE KILLING OF THE VICTIM
"And he shall kill the
bullock before the Lord." (Lev 1:5)
In the light of what has been already said, the significance of
this killing, in a typical way, will be quite clear. For with the
first sin, and again and again thereafter, God had denounced death
as the penalty of sin. But here is a sinner who, in accord with a
Divine command, brings before God a sacrificial victim, on whose
head he lays his hand, on which he thus rests as he confesses his
sins, and gives over the innocent victim to die instead of himself.
Thus each of these sacrificial deaths, whether in the burnt
offering, the peace offering, or the sin offering, brings ever
before us the death in the sinner’s stead of that one Holy Victim
who suffered for us, "the just for the unjust," and thus laid down
His life, in accord with His own previously declared intention, "as
a ransom for many."
In the sacrifices made by and for individuals, the victim was
killed, except in the case of the turtledove or pigeon, by the
offerer himself; but, very naturally, in the case of the national
and public offerings, it was killed by the priest. As, in this
latter case, it was impossible that all individual Israelites should
unite in killing the victim, it is plain that the priest herein
acted as the representative of the nation. Hence we may properly say
that the fundamental thought of the ritual was this, that the victim
should be killed by the offerer himself.
And by this ordinance we may well be reminded, first, how Israel,
-for whose sake as a nation the antitypical Sacrifice was offered,
-Israel itself became the executioner of the Victim; and, beyond
that, how, in a deeper sense, every sinner must regard himself as
truly causal of the Saviour’s death, in that, as is often truly
said, our sins nailed Christ to His cross. But whether such a
reference were intended in this law of the offering or not, the
great, significant, outstanding fact remains, that as soon as the
offerer, by his laying on of the hand, signified the transfer of the
personal obligation to die for sin from himself to the sacrificial
victim, then came at once upon that victim the penalty denounced
against sin.
And the added words, "before the Lord," cast further light upon
this, in that they remind us that the killing of the victim had
reference to Jehovah, whose holy law the offerer, failing of that
perfect consecration which the burnt offering symbolised, had failed
to glorify and honour.
THE SPRINKLING OF BLOOD
"And Aaron’s sons, the priests, shall present the blood, and
sprinkle the blood round about upon the altar that is at the door of
the tent of meeting." (Lev 1:5)
And now follows the fourth act in the ceremonial, the Sprinkling of
the Blood. The offerer’s part is now done, and herewith the work of
the priest begins. Even so must we, having laid the hand of faith
upon the head of the substituted Lamb of God, now leave it to the
heavenly Priest to act in our behalf with God.
The directions to the priest as to the use of the blood vary in the
different offerings, according as the design is to give greater or
less prominence to the idea of expiation. In the sin offering this
has the foremost place. But in the burnt offering, as also in the
peace offering, although the conception of atonement by blood was
not absent, it was not the dominant conception of the sacrifice.
Hence, while the sprinkling of blood by the priest could in no wise
be omitted, it took in this case a subordinate place in the ritual.
It was to be sprinkled only on the sides of the altar of burnt
offering which stood in the outer court. We read (Lev 1:5): "Aaron’s
sons, the priests, shall present the blood, and sprinkle the blood
round about upon the altar that is at the door of the tent of
meeting."
It was in this sprinkling of the blood that the atoning work was
completed. The altar had been appointed as a place of Jehovah’s
special presence; it had been designated as a place where God would
come unto man to bless him. Thus, to present and sprinkle the blood
upon the altar was symbolically to present the blood unto God. And
the blood represented life, -the life of an innocent victim atoning
for the sinner, because rendered upin the stead of his life. And the
priests were to sprinkle the blood. So, while to bring and present
the sacrifice of Christ, to lay the hand of faith upon His head, is
our part, with this our duty ends. To sprinkle the blood, to use the
blood God-ward for the remission of sin, this is the work alone of
our heavenly Priest. We are then to leave that with Him.
Reserving a fuller exposition of the meaning of this sprinkling of
blood for the exposition of the sin offering, in which it was the
central act of the ritual, we pass on now to the burning of the
sacrifice, which in this offering marked the culmination of its
special symbolism.
THE SACRIFICIAL BURNING
Lev 1:6-9; Lev 1:10-13; Lev 1:14-17
"And he shall flay the burnt offering, and cut it into its
pieces. And the sons of Aaron the priest shall put fire upon the
altar, and lay wood in order upon the fire: and Aaron’s sons, the
priests, shall lay the pieces, the head, and the fat, in order upon
the wood that is on the fire which is upon the altar: but its
inwards and its legs shall he wash with water: and the priest shall
burn the whole on the altar, for a burnt offering, an offering made
by fire of a sweet savour unto the Lord And he shall cut it into its
pieces, with its head and its fat: and the priest shall lay them in
order on the wood that is on the fire which is upon the altar: but
the inwards and the legs shall he wash with water: and the priest
shall offer the whole, and burn it upon the altar: it is a burnt
offering, an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the Lord
And he shall rend it by the wings thereof, but shall not divide it
asunder: and the priest shall burn it upon the altar, upon the wood
that is upon the fire: it is a burnt offering, an offering made by
fire, of a sweet savour unto the Lord."
It was the distinguishing peculiarity of the burnt offering, from
which it takes its name, that in every case the whole of it was
burned, and thus ascended heavenward in the fire and smoke of the
altar. The place of the burning, in this and other sacrifices, is
significant. The flesh of the sin offering, when not eaten, was to
be burned in a clean place without the camp. But it was the law of
the burnt offering that it should be wholly consumed upon the holy
altar at the door of the tent of meeting. In the directions for the
burning we need seek for no occult meaning; the most of them are
evidently intended simply as means to the end; namely, the
consumption of the offering with the utmost readiness, ease, and
completeness. Hence it must be flayed and cut into its pieces, and
carefully arranged upon the wood. The inwards and the legs must be
washed with water, that into the offering, as to be offered to the
Holy One, might come nothing extraneous, nothing corrupt and
unclean.
In Lev 1:10-13 and Lev 1:14-17 provision is made for the offering of
different victims, of the flock, or of the fowls. The reason for
this permitted variation, although not mentioned here, was doubtless
the same which is given for a similar permission in Lev 5:7, where
it is ordered that if the offerer’s means suffice not for a certain
offering, he may bring one of less value. Poverty shall be no plea
for not bringing a burnt sacrifice; to the Israelite of that time it
thus set forth the truth, that "if there first be a willing heart,
it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to
that he hath not."
The variations in the prescriptions regarding the different victims
to be used in the sacrifice are but slight. The bird having been
killed by the priest (why this change it is not easy to see), its
crop, with its contents of food unassimilated, and therefore not a
part of the bird, as also the feathers, was to be cast away. It was
not to be divided, like the bullock, and the sheep or goat, simply
because, with so small a creature, it was not necessary to the
speedy and entire combustion of the offering. In each case alike,
the declaration is made that the sacrifice, thus offered and wholly
burnt upon the altar, is "an offering made by fire, of a sweet
savour unto the Lord."
And now a question comes before us, the answer to which is vital to
the right understanding of the burnt offering, whether in its
original or typical import. What was the significance of the
burning? It has been very often answered that the consumption of the
victim by fire symbolised the consuming wrath of Jehovah, utterly
destroying the victim which represented the sinful person of the
offerer. And, observing that the burning followed the killing and
shedding of blood, some have even gone so far as to say that the
burning typified the eternal fire of hell! But when we remember
that, without doubt, the sacrificial victim in all the Levitical
offerings was a type of our blessed Lord, we may well agree with one
who justly calls this interpretation "hideous." And yet many, who
have shrunk from this, have yet in so far held to this conception of
the symbolic meaning of the burning as to insist that it must at
least have typified those fiery sufferings in which our Lord offered
up His soul for sin. They remind us how often, in the Scripture,
fire stands as the symbol of the consuming wrath of God against sin,
and hence argue that this may justly be taken here as the symbolic
meaning of the burning of the victim on the altar.
But this interpretation is nevertheless, in every form, to be
rejected. As regards the use of fire as a symbol in Holy Scripture,
while it is true that it often represents the punitive wrath of God,
it is equally certain that it has not always this meaning. Quite as
often it is the symbol of God’s purifying energy and might. Fire was
not the symbol of Jehovah’s vengeance in the burning bush. When the
Lord is represented as sitting "as a refiner and a purifier of
silver," surely the thought is not of vengeance, but of purifying
mercy. We should rather say that fire, in Scripture usage, is the
symbol of the intense energy of the Divine nature, which continually
acts upon every person and on every thing, according to the nature
of each person or thing; here conserving, there destroying; now
cleansing, now consuming. The same fire which burns the wood, hay,
and stubble, purifies the gold and the silver.
Hence, while it is quite true that fire often typifies the wrath of
God punishing sin, it is certain that it cannot always symbolise
this, not even in the sacrificial ritual. For in the meal offering
of chapter 2 it is impossible that the thought of expiation should
enter since no life is offered and no blood is shed; yet this also
is presented unto God in fire. The fire then in this case must mean
something else than the Divine wrath, and presumably must mean one
thing in all the sacrifices. And that not even in the burnt offering
can the burning of the sacrifice symbolise the consuming wrath of
God, becomes plain, when we observe that, according to the uniform
teaching of the sacrificial ritual, atonement is already fully
accomplished, prior to the burning, in the sprinkling of the blood.
That the burning, which follows the atonement, should have any
reference to Christ’s expiatory sufferings, is thus quite
impossible.
We must hold, therefore, that the burning can only mean in the burnt
offering that which alone it can signify in the meal offering;
namely, the ascending of the offering in consecration to God, on the
one hand; and, on the other, God’s gracious acceptance and
appropriation of the offering. This was impressively set forth in
the case of the burnt offering presented when the tabernacle service
was inaugurated; when, we are told (Lev 9:24), the fire which
consumed it came forth from before Jehovah, lighted by no human
hand, and was thus a visible representation of God accepting and
appropriating the offering to Himself.
The symbolism of the burning thus understood, we can now perceive
what must have been the special meaning of this sacrifice. As
regarded by the believing Israelite of those days, not yet
discerning clearly the deeper truth it shadowed forth as to the
great Burnt Sacrifice of the future, it must have symbolically
taught him that complete consecration unto God is essential to right
worship. There were sacrifices having a different special import, in
which, while a part was burnt, the offerer might even himself join
in eating the remaining part, taking that for his own use. But, in
the burnt offering, nothing was for himself: all was for God; and in
the fire of the altar God took the whole in such a way that the
offering forever passed beyond the offerer’s recall. In so far as
the offerer entered into this conception, and his inward experience
corresponded to this outward rite, it was for him an act of worship.
But to the thoughtful worshipper, one would think, it must sometimes
have occurred that, after all, it was not himself or his gift that
thus ascended in full consecration to God, but a victim appointed by
God to represent him in death on the altar. And thus it was that,
whether understood or not, the offering in its very nature pointed
to a Victim of the future, in whose person and work, as the One only
fully-consecrated Man, the burnt offering should receive its full
explication. And this brings us to the question, What aspect of the
person and work of our Lord was herein specially typified? It cannot
be the resultant fellowship with God, as in the peace offering; for
the sacrificial feast which set this forth was in this case wanting.
Neither can it be expiation for sin; for although this is expressly
represented here, yet it is not the chief thing. The principal
thing, in the burnt offering, was the burning, the complete
consumption of the victim in the sacrificial fire. Hence what is
represented chiefly here, is not so much Christ representing His
people in atoning death, as Christ representing His people in
perfect consecration and entire self-surrender unto God; in a word,
in perfect obedience.
Of these two things, the atoning death and the representative
obedience, we think, and with reason, much of the former; but most
Christians, though without reason, think less of the latter. And yet
how much is made of this aspect of our Lord’s work in the Gospels!
The first words which we hear from His lips are to this effect,
when, at twelve years of age, He asked His mother, {Luk 2:49} "Wist
ye not that I must be (lit.) in the things of My Father?" and after
His official work began in the first cleansing of the temple, this
manifestation of His character was such as to remind His disciples
that it was written, "The zeal of Thy house shall eat me up";
-phraseology which brings the burnt offering at once to mind. And
His constant testimony concerning Himself, to which His whole life
bare witness, was in such words as these: "I came down from heaven,
not to do My own will, but the will of Him that sent Me." In
particular, He especially regarded His atoning work in this aspect.
In the parable of the Good Shepherd, {Joh 10:1-18} for example,
after telling us that because of His laying down His life for the
sheep the Father loved Him, and that to this end He had received
from the Father authority to lay down His life for the sheep, He
then adds as the reason of this: "This commandment have I received
from My Father." And so elsewhere {Joh 12:49-50} He says of all His
words, as of all His works: "The Father hath given Me a commandment,
what I should say, and what I should speak; the things therefore
which I speak, even as the Father hath said unto Me, so I speak."
And when at last His earthly work approaches its close, and we see.
Him in the agony of Gethsemane, there He appears, above all, as the
perfectly consecrated One, offering Himself, body, soul, and spirit,
as a whole burnt offering unto God, in those never-to-be-forgotten
words, {Mat 26:39} "Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass
away from Me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as Thou wilt." And,
if any more proof were needed, we have it in that inspired
exposition {Heb 10:5-10} of Psa 40:6-8, wherein it is taught that
this perfect obedience of Christ, in full consecration, was indeed
the very thing which the Holy Ghost foresignified in the whole brunt
offerings of the law: "When He cometh into the world, He saith,
Sacrifice and offering Thou wouldest not, but a body didst Thou
prepare for Me; in whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin Thou
hadst no pleasure: then said I, Lo, I am come (in the roll of the
book it is written of Me) to do Thy will, O God." Thus the burnt
offering brings before us in type, for our faith, Christ as our
Saviour in virtue of His being the One wholly surrendered to the
will of the Father. Nor does this exclude, but rather defines, the
conception of Christ as our substitute and representative. For He
said that it was for our sakes that He "sanctified," or
"consecrated" Himself; {Joh 17:19} and while the New Testament
represents Him as saving us by His death as an expiation for sin, it
no less explicitly holds Him forth to us as having obeyed in our
behalf, declaring {Rom 5:19} that it is by the obedience of the One
Man that "many are made righteous." And, elsewhere, the same Apostle
represents the incomparable moral value of the atoning death of the
cross as consisting precisely in this fact, that it was a supreme
act of self-renouncing obedience, as it is written: {Php 2:6-9}
"Being in the form of God, He yet counted it not a prize to be on an
equality with God, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a
servant, being made in the likeness of men; becoming obedient even
unto death, yea, the death of the cross. Wherefore also God highly
exalted Him, and gave unto Him the name which is above every name."
And so the burnt offering teaches us to remember that Christ has not
only died for our sins, but has also consecrated Himself for us to
God in full self-surrender in our behalf. We are therefore to plead
not only His atoning death, but also the transcendent merit of His
life of full consecration to the Father’s will. To this, the words,
three times repeated concerning the burnt offering (Lev 1:9, Lev
1:13, Lev 1:17), in this chapter, blessedly apply: it is "an
offering made by fire, of a sweet savour," a fragrant odour, "unto
the Lord." That is, this full self-surrender of the holy Son of God
unto the Father is exceedingly delightful and acceptable unto God.
And for this reason it is for us an ever-prevailing argument for our
own acceptance, and for the gracious bestowment for Christ’s sake of
all that there is in Him for us.
Only let us ever remember that we cannot argue, as in the case of
the atoning death, that as Christ died that we might not die, so He
offered Himself in full consecration unto God, that we might thus be
released from this obligation. Here the exact opposite is the truth.
For Christ Himself said in His memorable prayer, just before His
offering of Himself to death, "For their sakes I sanctify (marg.
"consecrate") Myself, that they also might be sanctified in truth."
And thus is brought before us the thought, that if the sin offering
emphasised, as we shall see, the substitutionary death of Christ,
whereby He became our righteousness, the burnt offering, as
distinctively, brings before us Christ as our sanctification,
offering Himself without spot, a whole burnt offering to God. And as
by that one life of sinless obedience to the will of the Father He
procured our salvation by His merit, so in this respect He has also
become our one perfect Example of what consecration to God really
is. A thought this is which, with evident allusion to the burnt
offering, the Apostle Paul brings before us, charging us {Eph 5:2}
that we "walk in love, as Christ also loved us, and gave Himself for
us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for an odour of a sweet
smell."
And the law further suggests that no extreme of spiritual need can
debar anyone from availing Himself of our great Burnt sacrifice. A
burnt offering was to be received even from one who was so poor that
he could bring but a turtledove or a young pigeon (Lev 1:14). One
might, at first thought, not unnaturally say: Surely there can be
nothing in this to point to Christ; for the true Sacrifice is not
many, but one and only. And yet the very fact of this difference
allowed in the typical victims, when the reason of the allowance is
remembered, suggests the most precious truth concerning Christ, that
no spiritual poverty of the sinner need exclude him from the full
benefit of Christ’s saving work. Provision is made in Him for all
those who, most truly and with most reason, feel themselves to be
poor and in need of all things. Christ, as our sanctification, is
for all who will make use of Him; for all who, feeling most deeply
and painfully their own failure in full consecration, would take
Him, as not only their sin offering, but also their burnt offering,
both their example and their strength, unto perfect self-surrender
unto God. We may well here recall to mind the exhortation of the
Apostle to Christian believers, expressed in language which at once
reminds us of the burnt offering: {Rom 12:1} I beseech you,
brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living
sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable
service.
|