The Sacrificial System – How To Draw Near To God
The Peace Offering - Lev. 3
Several years ago I was reading through the church services section of the newspaper, and what I saw was pretty amazing. The listings went something like this. “Next Saturday the Lutheran church will be hosting a free-will ham dinner.” The next add said, “The Methodist Church will be serving baked ziti from 5 – 7 PM on Wednesday evening. Proceeds to help the Methodist Mission to America.” As I continued to scan down the listing, the Baptist were serving roast beef, the Episcopalians corned beef, and the Presbyterians were having a steak and clam bake. I kid you not, practically every listing mentioned food! What is this thing Christians have with food?
This morning we are going to see the historical roots of the importance of food to the follower of Christ, so let‟s look at Lev. 3 and investigate the peace offering.
Similar to last week in our study of the grain offering, this offering is known by several other names as well. Your Bible may refer to it as the “thank” offering, and one resource I consult calls it the “saving” offering. The word that is used to describe this offering is actually one of the Hebrew words most of us are familiar with, it is the greeting “shalom.” Literally, it means “peace,” and that is the word used in our text, hence, the peace offering. But the reason it is referred to as the saving offering is because this kind of offering was what was offered when a treaty was struck between two kings or nations at war. As applied to our relationship with God, when we are at peace with God we are “saved,” so in a very general sense we can call it a saving offering.
I want to take a minute and look at the handout you were given this morning. Remember that Leviticus has two basic sections, how to obtain fellowship with God and how to maintain fellowship with God. We are in this first section that deals with “how to draw near to God,” which is all about the sacrifices, but there is one division that you need to be aware of that isn‟t on your handout. Instructions concerning the final offering ends in chapter 6:7. Starting in 6:8 and going through the end of chapter 7, there is a quick overview of the five sacrifices, but the emphasis on the priesthood. Chs. 1 – 5 all focus on the person bringing the sacrifice – what kind of an animal can he bring, what kind of condition does it have to be in, how does he kill it, etc.; but this last chapter and a half focus on the priest’s actions during the sacrifice – what does he do with the ashes, where does he sprinkle the blood, what part gets burned and what part is waved before the Lord? It‟s all about the priesthood, not the one offering the sacrifice.
So with that in mind, let‟s think about the specifics of this peace offering. To begin with, either a male or female animal could be used (v. 1) – which was unlike the burnt offering, which had to be a male only. The animal had to be perfect, the one bringing the offering after he had placed his hand on the head to signify the transferral of his condition to the animal, he then killed the animal, cut it into pieces and gave it to the priest.
Where things start to get a little different from the burnt offering is seen in verses 3 – 5. “And from the sacrifice of the peace offerings, he shall present an offering by fire to the LORD, [now note what gets put on the altar] the fat that covers the entrails and all the fat that is on the entrails, and the two kidneys with the fat that is on them, which is on the loins, and the lobe of the liver [another piece of fat], which he shall remove with the kidneys. 'Then Aaron's sons shall offer it up in smoke on the altar on the burnt offering, which is on the wood that is on the fire; it is an offering by fire of a soothing aroma to the LORD.”
Interestingly enough, the only parts of the animal that were thrown on the fire and consumed were the fat and the kidneys. Anatomically, it was only the fat that was easily removed. The one bringing the sacrifice didn‟t spend hours carving the animal up – he just took of the large areas of fat that were easily accessible. But this burning of the fat and kidneys only alerts us that something is a little different about this offering, and we see that difference elaborated on a little bit more in verse 11. Let‟s read this verse again and see if you can see a phrase we haven‟t come across yet. “The priest shall offer it up in smoke on the altar, as food, an offering by fire to the Lord.” What is the significance of this phrase – “as food,” especially in light of the fact that God doesn‟t need food? This phrase lets us know the primary significance of the peace offering, and that is that this is the only offering that involved eating a meal. It didn‟t come out explicitly in our reading of chapter three, but let‟s look at chapter seven where we see the rest of the information about this offering.
Starting in verse 11 we see the beginning of the instructions for the peace offering. “Now this is the law of the sacrifice of peace offerings which shall be presented to the LORD.” Drop down to verse 15 where we read, “Now as for the flesh of the sacrifice of his thanksgiving peace offerings, it shall be eaten on the day of his offering; he shall not leave any of it over until morning. 16 'But if the sacrifice of his offering is a votive or a freewill offering, it shall be eaten on the day that he offers his sacrifice; and on the next day what is left of it may be eaten; 17 but what is left over from the flesh of the sacrifice on the third day shall be burned with fire.” And then we drop down to verse 33 and read, “The one among the sons of Aaron who offers the blood of the peace offerings and the fat, the right thigh shall be his as his portion. 34 'For I have taken the breast of the wave offering and the thigh of the contribution from the sons of Israel from the sacrifices of their peace offerings, and have given them to Aaron the priest and to his sons as their due forever from the sons of Israel.”
What sets the peace offering apart from all the other ones is that it provided a meal for the officiating priest (the thigh and the breast), the person bringing the sacrifice (everything else), and, according to 3:11, even in a symbolic sense, God himself.
Let‟s look at a couple of other interesting dimensions of this offering that are brought out in chapter 7. In verse 30 we read “His own hands are to bring offerings by fire to the LORD. He shall bring the fat with the breast, that the breast may be presented as a wave offering before the LORD.” Then in verse 34 we read, “For I have taken the breast of the wave offering and the thigh of the contribution from the sons of Israel from the sacrifices of their peace offerings, and have given them to Aaron the priest and to his sons as their due forever from the sons of Israel.” From Ex. 29 we see that the thigh portion of this offering was to be “heaved” before the Lord.
The wave offering and the heave offering were not separate offerings, but a sub-category of the peace offering. “Waving” referred to a horizontal motion made with the breast portion, and “heaving” referred to a perpendicular motion made with the thigh portion. It didn‟t mean it was thrown! Both were symbolic gestures showing that ultimately they belonged to the Lord.
And while we are talking about sub-categories of the peace offering, chapter 7 shows us three more. First of all in verse 12 we see it could be a thanksgiving peace offering. “If he offers it by way of thanksgiving, then along with the sacrifice of thanksgiving he shall offer unleavened cakes mixed with oil, and unleavened wafers spread with oil, and cakes of well stirred fine flour mixed with oil.” Then down in verse 16, we see two additional choices, the peace offering could be a votive offering, probably better understood as a “vow” peace offering, or it could be a “freewill” peace offering. “But if the sacrifice of his offering is a votive or a freewill offering, it shall be eaten on the day that he offers his sacrifice; and on the next day what is left of it may be eaten.”
So the thing to remember about the peace offering it that it was a broad category of offerings, all of them voluntary offerings, just like the burnt and grain offerings. You offered them at your own initiative, there was no compulsion. And the most striking element of the peace offering is that it involved eating. We‟ll come back to that in a moment, but as we think about eating, I want us to think quickly about the prohibition on fat and blood. In 3:16 we read, “all fat is the LORD's. It is a perpetual statute throughout your generations in all your dwellings: you shall not eat any fat or any blood.” Then it is reiterated in chapter 7. 23“Speak to the sons of Israel, saying, 'You shall not eat any fat from an ox, a sheep, or a goat. [Note that the prohibition extends beyond sacrificial meals] 24 'Also the fat of an animal which dies, and the fat of an animal torn by beasts, may be put to any other use [candles, lubrication, medical], but you must certainly not eat it. 25 'For [and here we see how seriously God took this matter] whoever eats the fat of the animal from which an offering by fire is offered to the LORD, even the person who eats shall be cut off from his people.”
This is an interesting dimension of Israel‟s laws, and it catches our attention for at least four reasons.
1) First of all, it is called a “perpetual statute.” That means it is a long-term, binding, significant stipulation. This calls attention to the gravity of the rule.
2) It is not mentioned in conjunction with any of the other sacrifices – truly unique to this offering.
3) It applied to home life as well, not just the sacrificial meal. This means that the object lesson was to be visible on a daily basis, not just periodically as the sacrifice was made. And finally,
4) It is reiterated in chapter 7. God saw fit to make sure His people heard the rule twice.
So, what is the big deal about fat and blood? Let‟s start with blood. When we think about blood, our minds go back to Gen. 9:3-4. “Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant. 4 "Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.” Blood is what gives life to our flesh. If you cut off the blood flow to an organ, it will die because blood is what carries life giving nutrients and oxygen. That is in the physical realm. In the non-physical realm, we know that it is God who gives life to our flesh. In Gen. 2:7 we read that “the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living being.” What I want you to see is that blood is the physical representation of the spiritual reality. There is a connection between blood, and God, and life. That is why blood had to be poured out. It was sacred. The pagans would drink blood in hopes that the strength and vitality of the victim would become theirs. And God didn‟t let His people do that. And every time the blood was drained from an animal and poured out, God was reminding His people that He was the source of life for all flesh.
But what about the fat? Many people would look at this prohibition and see in it God‟s concern for the physical health of the nation. They would say that today we know that fat is bad for you – it causes heart disease, clogs your veins, and is linked to cancer and digestive disorders; but 4,000 years ago, people didn‟t know this, so God was protecting His people. They would say this is the thinking behind the prohibition against eating catfish an eels – they are bottom feeders. What is at the bottom of ponds and rivers, in addition to mud? All the feces of all the animals that inhabit that water! So to protect the health of the Israelites, God banned those kinds of fish from being eaten.
I don‟t believe that is the rationale here. Is fat really bad for you? Not necessarily. In the 1980‟s fat was public enemy #1, but now health experts are a little more cautious in their assertions. Now, in certain contexts fat is bad, such as when you eat too much of it, or when it is accompanied by a sedentary lifestyle, but eating fat isn‟t like eating poison. I remember a teacher telling us about his grandmother who collected all the fat on the plates leftover from the Sunday ham, she would sprinkle salt on it, and then eat it! And then he said, “It killed her!” when she was 93. In the Arctic regions where great amounts of energy is consumed keeping your body warm, fat is a vital part of your diet. So I don‟t believe what God is after here is a health provision.
Think with me a little bit about fat. Up until the last couple of hundred years, fat was an incredibly valuable asset. If you were to drive across the Rip Van Winkle bridge and go to Hudson, you could look at the street signs and see that all of them have a little whale on them. What is that all about? Hudson used to be a whaling town. Some historians think that whales used to come up the Hudson River as far as Poughkeepsie (an Indian word for “where the fresh meets the salt), but more likely is that the whaling vessels would bring their loads of whale blubber to Hudson to be rendered into whale oil. And when you think about it, whale oil was similar to the petroleum industry 200 years ago. So remember, fat was valuable.
Secondly, fat used to be a sign of wealth. What do you suppose is the connection between fat and wealth? Only wealthy people could afford enough food to get fat. So if you were fat, that said something about your net worth, especially in the Arabic world! When I was in college, we had an elderly missionary speaking in chapel one time, and I only remember one thing about his message. He had spent many years working in Arabic lands, and he told us that in their culture, fat was a sign of beauty. Again, it was tied to wealth, but more than that, fat was prized as being desirable in a woman. And what was disgusting to us was that some sheiks had harems of women who were so obese, they couldn‟t walk. He compared them to walruses that just rolled around to get to where they wanted to go. So in the Arabic culture, fat was not disgusting – it was a valuable commodity, and it signified health, wealth, and beauty.
And it burns very well! I believe that part of what was going on in burning the fat is that in the practical realm, it helped the fire burn. But this understanding of the prohibition of eating fat fits perfectly into the overarching meaning of the offering in that it was costly! That was a valuable portion of the animal, and to whom did it belong? God. Lev. 3:16 – “The fat belongs to the Lord.” So what we see in this prohibition is more object lessons – God is the one who gives life, whether to man or animal; and the valuable fat was sacrificed to God.
What does this mean for us today? I want to read a paragraph explaining the rationale of our fellowship committee. “It is hard to overstate the importance of social fellowship in the life of the follower of Christ. Jesus and the disciples apparently spent a lot of time eating (they must have been Baptists), and the connection between food and significant spiritual events is startling. Jesus‟ first miracle took place in the context of a wedding and involved the miraculous creation of wine (John 2). Several other miracles involved food as well (Mt. 14, 15). He instituted the Lord‟s Supper at a meal (Mt. 26), and a church-wide fellowship meal was a regular part of the early church (1 Cor. 11). After Peter denied Jesus, he was restored to fellowship during a breakfast shared with the risen Christ (Jn. 21). Profound spiritual truths were taught in the context of meals as well. Mary and Martha learned about what things are really necessary in life at a meal (Lk. 10), and Simon the Pharisee learned a huge lesson about forgiveness during a dinner (Lk. 7). It is not surprising then, that a large meal figures prominently in our entrance into heaven (Rev. 19:9).”
Parties who are estranged from one another cannot eat a meal together – they have to be at peace to be able to do that. And that is the significance of the peace offering.
Friday, February 4, 2011
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
The Grain Offering
The Sacrificial System – How To Draw Near To God
The Grain Offering - Lev. 2
This morning we are going to be in Lev. 2 and consider the second offering God prescribed for the nation of Israel as a means for them to draw near to their God. It is known by a variety of names – meal, grain, and even meat (Keil and Delitzsch, Edersheim). I‟ll be referring to it as a grain offering because it consists of grain being offered on the altar in a variety of forms.
Memory Project: “Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, „Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them, „I am the LORD your God. You shall not do what is done in the land of Egypt where you lived, nor are you to do what is done in the land of Canaan where I am bringing you; you shall not walk in their statutes. You are to perform My judgments and keep My statutes, to live in accord with them; I am the LORD your God. So you shall keep My statutes and My judgments, by which a man may live if he does them; I am the LORD.‟”
Very quickly, someone remind us of the theme of Leviticus. Right. It is “the holiness of God.” What does holy mean? Holy means separate, set apart, or sacred. God was holy, and the nation of Israel wasn‟t! So if they wanted to be in fellowship with their God, two things had to happen. First of all, they had to be aware of what was separating them from their holy God, and second, they had to have a means of dealing with the things separating them. Everything in the book of Leviticus falls under one of those two general categories. What constitutes separation from God, and how do I deal with it?
Remember too that Leviticus is full of object lessons. God graciously illustrated for His people what holiness looked like, and the first set of object lessons was the five sacrifices, or offerings. What is the root idea of the word “offering?” To draw near. If these people who were separated from their God wanted to get close to God, or to “draw near” to God, there was a specific way they could do it. So last week we looked at the burnt offering in which the one bringing the animal slit its throat, cut it into pieces, and then gave to the priest to throw on the altar. The entire animal was consumed in the fire on the altar – none of it was burned outside of the camp, the priest didn‟t get to keep a part of it, and the one bringing the burnt offering didn‟t get to share a meal from it with the priest, like some of the other offerings.
This morning we are going to look at the grain offering, and this offering is in a category all by itself in that it is the only offering that didn‟t involve the shedding of blood. This fact alerts us to the purpose behind the offering, which we will see at the end of the message, but for now, just keep in mind as we are going through the particulars that this offering has special significance for the one bringing it.
Let‟s start with the word that is translated as “grain” in the phrase “grain offering” in verse one. “When anyone presents a grain offering as an offering to the Lord, his offering shall be of fine flour.” There is a very interesting word used here that really doesn‟t have anything to do with corn or wheat or barley. The word literally means “gift, tribute, offering,” or “present.” We see the concept illustrated in Gen. 32 where Jacob is on his way back home after spending 14 years in exile at his uncle‟s house. If you remember the story, Jacob tricked his older brother into giving up the family inheritance and then fled for his life. But in Gen. 32, he is now a wealthy man and on his way home knowing that he is going to have to face his brother. And he has no idea how Esau is going to respond – but he is clearly fearing for his life! So in Gen. 32 let‟s start reading in verse 13.
"So he spent the night there. Then he selected from what he had with him a present for his brother Esau: 14 two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams,15 thirty milking camels and their colts, forty cows and ten bulls, twenty female donkeys and ten male donkeys. 16 And he delivered them into the hand of his servants, every drove by itself, and said to his servants, "Pass on before me, and put a space between droves." 17 And he commanded the one in front, saying, "When my brother Esau meets you and asks you, saying, 'To whom do you belong, and where are you going, and to whom do these animals in front of you belong?'18 then you shall say, 'These belong to your servant Jacob; it is a present sent to my lord Esau. And behold, he also is behind us.'" 19 Then he commanded also the second and the third, and all those who followed the droves, saying, "After this manner you shall speak to Esau when you find him; 20 and you shall say, 'Behold, your servant Jacob also is behind us.'" For he said, "I will appease him with the present that goes before me. Then afterward I will see his face; perhaps he will accept me."
That is the idea behind the word translated as “grain” in the phrase “grain offering.” It is a “gift” or “present” used to “draw near” to God. The reason the translators use the word “grain” is because of what we see in verse one – “his offering shall be of fine flour,” and verse 14, “if you bring a grain offering of early ripened things to the Lord, you shall bring fresh heads of grain roasted in the fire.”
Concerning the specifics of this offering, there were four different ways you could bring it – it could be flour baked in an oven as we see in verse 4, or fried on a griddle as we see in verse 5, or something like a dumpling or donut boiled in oil as we see in verse 7. The NAS says, “Now if your offering is a grain offering made in a pan, it shall be made of fine flour with oil.” The Hebrew there indicates something a little different as the New English Translation shows, “If your offering is a grain offering made in a pan [the NKJV calls it a “covered pan”, so it would be similar to a pot], it must be made of choice wheat flour deep fried in olive oil.” The final way this offering could be made was to bring roasted grain, as we see in verse 14.
Of particular interest to us is the kind of flour that was used. It is repeatedly referred to as “fine flour,” to be contrasted with roughly ground flour that would be more like corn meal. Some of the resources I have been using referred to this as “spun” flour to reflect how it was obtained. After the wheat was ground, it was put into a bag that allowed only the finest particles of flour to come out, and it was spun around in a larger container. The centrifugal force of the spinning would force the fine flour through the cloth, where it would be collected and spun again in a finer woven bag. Jewish tradition stipulated that the flour used in these offerings had to be spun 13 times!
So as we think of what this offering entailed, don‟t envision going to the pantry and getting out some flour, making it into a batter, frying it, and then bringing it to the tabernacle to be used as a grain offering. It was much more involved than that, and in keeping with the costly nature of a sacrifice. While the grain offering may not represent the financial sacrifice that a burnt offering represented, it did represent a significant sacrifice of your personal time.
In the grain offering we are introduced to an element not seen in the burnt offering, and we see it in verses two and three. “He shall then bring it [the fine flour] to Aaron's sons, the priests; and shall take from it his handful of its fine flour and of its oil with all of its frankincense. And the priest shall offer it up in smoke as its memorial portion on the altar, an offering by fire of a soothing aroma to the LORD. 3 'And the remainder of the grain offering belongs to Aaron and his sons: a thing most holy, of the offerings to the LORD by fire.” Only a portion of the sacrifice was put on the altar and burned, the rest of the offering went to the priest.
We will deal with this more fully when we look at the priesthood, but for now just understand that this was God‟s way of providing for the priesthood. The overarching principle is that since the “men of God,” or the priests, spent their days caring for the spiritual needs of the people of God, the people of God were to take care of the material needs of the priesthood.
Now, there were three special rules that applied to this sacrifice, found in verses 11 – 13. “No grain offering, which you bring to the LORD, shall be made with leaven, for you shall not offer up in smoke any leaven or any honey as an offering by fire to the LORD. As an offering of first fruits, you shall bring them to the LORD, but they shall not ascend for a soothing aroma on the altar. Every grain offering of yours, moreover, you shall season with salt, so that the salt of the covenant of your God shall not be lacking from your grain offering; with all your offerings you shall offer salt.”
The three rules were no leaven, no honey, and salt had to be added. Why the prohibition against leaven and honey? Leaven, or yeast as we know it, and honey were both used in fermentation. If you had some grape juice that you wanted to turn into wine, you added yeast and sugar, in the form of honey. If you had some grape juice you wanted to turn to vinegar, you added honey and let it ferment. But understand that there was nothing intrinsically evil or wrong with either of these ingredients. We know that because leaven could be used in the offering of firstfruits (v. 12), but it could not be used in an offering that was burned on the altar. So why the prohibition?
Remember that one of the unique elements of Leviticus is God‟s use of object lessons. He often took ordinary things to teach eternal truths, and we see this in the rejection of honey and leaven. What both of these substances were know for was their pervasive nature. In other words, a small amount affected the whole batch. One cup of sugar can ferment an entire gallon of kombucha. One tablespoon of yeast can double the size of a lump of dough. Honey and yeast don‟t stay contained – they spread. That is their nature, and it is because of this that leaven is often compared to sin. In both 1 Cor. 5 and Gal. 5, Paul makes the statement that “a little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough,” and he says it in the context of unrepentant sinful people in close proximity to God‟s people. He goes on to say, “clean out the old leaven so that you may be a new lump.” And then just to make sure they understood his point, he ends the chapter by saying, “Remove the wicked man from among yourselves.”
God‟s point with the prohibition is that these two elements, know for their spreading and corrupting influence (fermentation is a corruption of the original liquie), have no part in a holy sacrifice that is going to ascend to Him in smoke on an altar. God wants purity. He wants a perfect animal. He wants flour that has been refined, and refined, and refined to the point that it is pure and without any corrupting influences.
But what about salt though? Salt is so common to us today that it is meaningless, but salt used to be so rare that it was very valuable. Our word “salary” comes from the Latin salarium, which is a form of sal, or Latin for salt, and it is believed that at one time, Roman soldiers were paid in salt because it was so valuable. So in the days of the Old Testament, to add salt to a sacrifice was a costly thing to do, but it didn‟t end there because salt also had symbolic importance, much like leaven and honey. Salt, as we all know, is a preservative. It draws the moisture out of food to enable the food to last for long periods of time. This is why we have things like salt cured ham and salted fish.
I have cabbage in my basement that is salted and preserved. This summer, I‟d lay down a layer of shredded cabbage, salt it, and then pound it flat. Then another layer of cabbage and more salt and pounding. Then another layer of cabbage and salt and pounding. And eventually, the crock was full of the liquid that had been sucked out of the cabbage. You let it sit in that brine for three or four weeks, and you have sauerkraut that doesn‟t need refrigeration. Because of the salting, it is preserved. Salt stops the course of nature as living matter starts to break down and deteriorate.
That is the nature of salt – it is a preservative. Which is why as recently as a hundred years ago, salt was being used symbolically in Arabic cultures to seal deals and invoke a binding nature to an agreement. The two parties would sprinkle a little salt on the ground, and that made the agreement permanent. This helps us understand Num. 18:19 a little better. “All the offerings of the holy gifts, which the sons of Israel offer to the LORD, I have given to you and your sons and your daughters with you, as a perpetual allotment. [Now listen to how God describes these offerings.] [They are] an everlasting covenant of salt before the LORD to you and your descendants with you.” So to add salt to the offering was a symbolic gesture invoking permanence and incorruption.
Finally, the grain offering was another voluntary offering. Or as we described it last week, it was a free will offering. It was something you did at your own initiative, and it was usually offered at the same time of the burnt offering or peace offering, but could be offered all by itself. And in verse 2 we see that it was described as a “sweet savor” to the Lord. What is this “sweet savor” that described these first three offerings: the burnt, the grain, and the peace offering (the other category of offerings was the “non-sweet savor,” which were the sin and trespass offerings)? The best way to understand it is to think of it from the perspective of being “pleasing.” When you walk past a house where they are grilling something outside, you say, “m-m-m-m-m . . . that smells nice.” It is a pleasant smell, and God was pleased when His people would on their own initiative draw near to Him with a sacrifice.
I want to close this morning by pointing out one of the differences between the burnt offering and the grain offering. The burnt offering accomplished atonement, as we saw in 1:4. That means the person‟s sinfulness was covered up and he was acceptable to God. Note that the grain offering did not accomplish atonement! This means that the purpose behind this offering had nothing to do with wanting to be acceptable to God, it was all about appreciation for God. When your heart welled up with gratitude for everything God had done for you, you brought a grain offering. You weren‟t looking for anything from God. You weren‟t after acceptance, like in the burn offering. You weren‟t after peace, like in next week‟s peace offering. You were simply saying to God, “Thank you.”
The Grain Offering - Lev. 2
This morning we are going to be in Lev. 2 and consider the second offering God prescribed for the nation of Israel as a means for them to draw near to their God. It is known by a variety of names – meal, grain, and even meat (Keil and Delitzsch, Edersheim). I‟ll be referring to it as a grain offering because it consists of grain being offered on the altar in a variety of forms.
Memory Project: “Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, „Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them, „I am the LORD your God. You shall not do what is done in the land of Egypt where you lived, nor are you to do what is done in the land of Canaan where I am bringing you; you shall not walk in their statutes. You are to perform My judgments and keep My statutes, to live in accord with them; I am the LORD your God. So you shall keep My statutes and My judgments, by which a man may live if he does them; I am the LORD.‟”
Very quickly, someone remind us of the theme of Leviticus. Right. It is “the holiness of God.” What does holy mean? Holy means separate, set apart, or sacred. God was holy, and the nation of Israel wasn‟t! So if they wanted to be in fellowship with their God, two things had to happen. First of all, they had to be aware of what was separating them from their holy God, and second, they had to have a means of dealing with the things separating them. Everything in the book of Leviticus falls under one of those two general categories. What constitutes separation from God, and how do I deal with it?
Remember too that Leviticus is full of object lessons. God graciously illustrated for His people what holiness looked like, and the first set of object lessons was the five sacrifices, or offerings. What is the root idea of the word “offering?” To draw near. If these people who were separated from their God wanted to get close to God, or to “draw near” to God, there was a specific way they could do it. So last week we looked at the burnt offering in which the one bringing the animal slit its throat, cut it into pieces, and then gave to the priest to throw on the altar. The entire animal was consumed in the fire on the altar – none of it was burned outside of the camp, the priest didn‟t get to keep a part of it, and the one bringing the burnt offering didn‟t get to share a meal from it with the priest, like some of the other offerings.
This morning we are going to look at the grain offering, and this offering is in a category all by itself in that it is the only offering that didn‟t involve the shedding of blood. This fact alerts us to the purpose behind the offering, which we will see at the end of the message, but for now, just keep in mind as we are going through the particulars that this offering has special significance for the one bringing it.
Let‟s start with the word that is translated as “grain” in the phrase “grain offering” in verse one. “When anyone presents a grain offering as an offering to the Lord, his offering shall be of fine flour.” There is a very interesting word used here that really doesn‟t have anything to do with corn or wheat or barley. The word literally means “gift, tribute, offering,” or “present.” We see the concept illustrated in Gen. 32 where Jacob is on his way back home after spending 14 years in exile at his uncle‟s house. If you remember the story, Jacob tricked his older brother into giving up the family inheritance and then fled for his life. But in Gen. 32, he is now a wealthy man and on his way home knowing that he is going to have to face his brother. And he has no idea how Esau is going to respond – but he is clearly fearing for his life! So in Gen. 32 let‟s start reading in verse 13.
"So he spent the night there. Then he selected from what he had with him a present for his brother Esau: 14 two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams,15 thirty milking camels and their colts, forty cows and ten bulls, twenty female donkeys and ten male donkeys. 16 And he delivered them into the hand of his servants, every drove by itself, and said to his servants, "Pass on before me, and put a space between droves." 17 And he commanded the one in front, saying, "When my brother Esau meets you and asks you, saying, 'To whom do you belong, and where are you going, and to whom do these animals in front of you belong?'18 then you shall say, 'These belong to your servant Jacob; it is a present sent to my lord Esau. And behold, he also is behind us.'" 19 Then he commanded also the second and the third, and all those who followed the droves, saying, "After this manner you shall speak to Esau when you find him; 20 and you shall say, 'Behold, your servant Jacob also is behind us.'" For he said, "I will appease him with the present that goes before me. Then afterward I will see his face; perhaps he will accept me."
That is the idea behind the word translated as “grain” in the phrase “grain offering.” It is a “gift” or “present” used to “draw near” to God. The reason the translators use the word “grain” is because of what we see in verse one – “his offering shall be of fine flour,” and verse 14, “if you bring a grain offering of early ripened things to the Lord, you shall bring fresh heads of grain roasted in the fire.”
Concerning the specifics of this offering, there were four different ways you could bring it – it could be flour baked in an oven as we see in verse 4, or fried on a griddle as we see in verse 5, or something like a dumpling or donut boiled in oil as we see in verse 7. The NAS says, “Now if your offering is a grain offering made in a pan, it shall be made of fine flour with oil.” The Hebrew there indicates something a little different as the New English Translation shows, “If your offering is a grain offering made in a pan [the NKJV calls it a “covered pan”, so it would be similar to a pot], it must be made of choice wheat flour deep fried in olive oil.” The final way this offering could be made was to bring roasted grain, as we see in verse 14.
Of particular interest to us is the kind of flour that was used. It is repeatedly referred to as “fine flour,” to be contrasted with roughly ground flour that would be more like corn meal. Some of the resources I have been using referred to this as “spun” flour to reflect how it was obtained. After the wheat was ground, it was put into a bag that allowed only the finest particles of flour to come out, and it was spun around in a larger container. The centrifugal force of the spinning would force the fine flour through the cloth, where it would be collected and spun again in a finer woven bag. Jewish tradition stipulated that the flour used in these offerings had to be spun 13 times!
So as we think of what this offering entailed, don‟t envision going to the pantry and getting out some flour, making it into a batter, frying it, and then bringing it to the tabernacle to be used as a grain offering. It was much more involved than that, and in keeping with the costly nature of a sacrifice. While the grain offering may not represent the financial sacrifice that a burnt offering represented, it did represent a significant sacrifice of your personal time.
In the grain offering we are introduced to an element not seen in the burnt offering, and we see it in verses two and three. “He shall then bring it [the fine flour] to Aaron's sons, the priests; and shall take from it his handful of its fine flour and of its oil with all of its frankincense. And the priest shall offer it up in smoke as its memorial portion on the altar, an offering by fire of a soothing aroma to the LORD. 3 'And the remainder of the grain offering belongs to Aaron and his sons: a thing most holy, of the offerings to the LORD by fire.” Only a portion of the sacrifice was put on the altar and burned, the rest of the offering went to the priest.
We will deal with this more fully when we look at the priesthood, but for now just understand that this was God‟s way of providing for the priesthood. The overarching principle is that since the “men of God,” or the priests, spent their days caring for the spiritual needs of the people of God, the people of God were to take care of the material needs of the priesthood.
Now, there were three special rules that applied to this sacrifice, found in verses 11 – 13. “No grain offering, which you bring to the LORD, shall be made with leaven, for you shall not offer up in smoke any leaven or any honey as an offering by fire to the LORD. As an offering of first fruits, you shall bring them to the LORD, but they shall not ascend for a soothing aroma on the altar. Every grain offering of yours, moreover, you shall season with salt, so that the salt of the covenant of your God shall not be lacking from your grain offering; with all your offerings you shall offer salt.”
The three rules were no leaven, no honey, and salt had to be added. Why the prohibition against leaven and honey? Leaven, or yeast as we know it, and honey were both used in fermentation. If you had some grape juice that you wanted to turn into wine, you added yeast and sugar, in the form of honey. If you had some grape juice you wanted to turn to vinegar, you added honey and let it ferment. But understand that there was nothing intrinsically evil or wrong with either of these ingredients. We know that because leaven could be used in the offering of firstfruits (v. 12), but it could not be used in an offering that was burned on the altar. So why the prohibition?
Remember that one of the unique elements of Leviticus is God‟s use of object lessons. He often took ordinary things to teach eternal truths, and we see this in the rejection of honey and leaven. What both of these substances were know for was their pervasive nature. In other words, a small amount affected the whole batch. One cup of sugar can ferment an entire gallon of kombucha. One tablespoon of yeast can double the size of a lump of dough. Honey and yeast don‟t stay contained – they spread. That is their nature, and it is because of this that leaven is often compared to sin. In both 1 Cor. 5 and Gal. 5, Paul makes the statement that “a little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough,” and he says it in the context of unrepentant sinful people in close proximity to God‟s people. He goes on to say, “clean out the old leaven so that you may be a new lump.” And then just to make sure they understood his point, he ends the chapter by saying, “Remove the wicked man from among yourselves.”
God‟s point with the prohibition is that these two elements, know for their spreading and corrupting influence (fermentation is a corruption of the original liquie), have no part in a holy sacrifice that is going to ascend to Him in smoke on an altar. God wants purity. He wants a perfect animal. He wants flour that has been refined, and refined, and refined to the point that it is pure and without any corrupting influences.
But what about salt though? Salt is so common to us today that it is meaningless, but salt used to be so rare that it was very valuable. Our word “salary” comes from the Latin salarium, which is a form of sal, or Latin for salt, and it is believed that at one time, Roman soldiers were paid in salt because it was so valuable. So in the days of the Old Testament, to add salt to a sacrifice was a costly thing to do, but it didn‟t end there because salt also had symbolic importance, much like leaven and honey. Salt, as we all know, is a preservative. It draws the moisture out of food to enable the food to last for long periods of time. This is why we have things like salt cured ham and salted fish.
I have cabbage in my basement that is salted and preserved. This summer, I‟d lay down a layer of shredded cabbage, salt it, and then pound it flat. Then another layer of cabbage and more salt and pounding. Then another layer of cabbage and salt and pounding. And eventually, the crock was full of the liquid that had been sucked out of the cabbage. You let it sit in that brine for three or four weeks, and you have sauerkraut that doesn‟t need refrigeration. Because of the salting, it is preserved. Salt stops the course of nature as living matter starts to break down and deteriorate.
That is the nature of salt – it is a preservative. Which is why as recently as a hundred years ago, salt was being used symbolically in Arabic cultures to seal deals and invoke a binding nature to an agreement. The two parties would sprinkle a little salt on the ground, and that made the agreement permanent. This helps us understand Num. 18:19 a little better. “All the offerings of the holy gifts, which the sons of Israel offer to the LORD, I have given to you and your sons and your daughters with you, as a perpetual allotment. [Now listen to how God describes these offerings.] [They are] an everlasting covenant of salt before the LORD to you and your descendants with you.” So to add salt to the offering was a symbolic gesture invoking permanence and incorruption.
Finally, the grain offering was another voluntary offering. Or as we described it last week, it was a free will offering. It was something you did at your own initiative, and it was usually offered at the same time of the burnt offering or peace offering, but could be offered all by itself. And in verse 2 we see that it was described as a “sweet savor” to the Lord. What is this “sweet savor” that described these first three offerings: the burnt, the grain, and the peace offering (the other category of offerings was the “non-sweet savor,” which were the sin and trespass offerings)? The best way to understand it is to think of it from the perspective of being “pleasing.” When you walk past a house where they are grilling something outside, you say, “m-m-m-m-m . . . that smells nice.” It is a pleasant smell, and God was pleased when His people would on their own initiative draw near to Him with a sacrifice.
I want to close this morning by pointing out one of the differences between the burnt offering and the grain offering. The burnt offering accomplished atonement, as we saw in 1:4. That means the person‟s sinfulness was covered up and he was acceptable to God. Note that the grain offering did not accomplish atonement! This means that the purpose behind this offering had nothing to do with wanting to be acceptable to God, it was all about appreciation for God. When your heart welled up with gratitude for everything God had done for you, you brought a grain offering. You weren‟t looking for anything from God. You weren‟t after acceptance, like in the burn offering. You weren‟t after peace, like in next week‟s peace offering. You were simply saying to God, “Thank you.”
Friday, January 21, 2011
The Burnt Offering
Studies in Leviticus
The Sacrificial System – How To Draw Near To God
The Burnt Offering -Lev. 1
I‟d like you to turn in your Bibles to Leviticus chapter 1, and this morning we are going to start our study of the Old Testament sacrificial system. As I explained to you last week, this is not only a legitimate use of our time since all of God‟s Word is “profitable” according to 1 Tim. 3:16, it is valuable because of how it will enhance our appreciation of not only Jesus (especially as we study the sacrificial system and the priesthood) and what He has done for us but also of the New Covenant and life under the stipulations of grace.
Quick review: The theme of Leviticus is “the holiness of God.” Holy means “separate, set apart, or sacred.” The opposite of holy is common. Paper plates and plastic utensils are common. They are mass produced, used once, and then thrown out. But fine china and silver are sacred. We set them apart in special cabinets with glass doors and soft lighting. Since God is holy, only holy people can be in fellowship with Him. It doesn‟t matter if you lived 4,000 years ago in Israel, 2,000 years ago in Jerusalem, or if you are alive today – only holy people can be in fellowship with a holy God. But because holiness is somewhat abstract, in the book of Leviticus, God gives the nation of Israel a way to visualize holiness (remember the concept of object lessons). In the Old Testament system, holiness could actually be measured and viewed. The sacrifices, the offerings, the priesthood, and the laws concerning clean and unclean all served to quantify holiness. If you did all the “stuff,” you could be in communion and fellowship with a holy God.
Finally, let‟s say our memory project together. “Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, „Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them, „I am the LORD your God. You shall not do what is done in the land of Egypt where you lived, nor are you to do what is done in the land of Canaan where I am bringing you; you shall not walk in their statutes. You are to perform My judgments and keep My statutes, to live in accord with them; I am the LORD your God. So you shall keep My statutes and My judgments, by which a man may live if he does them; I am the LORD.‟”
So if you aren‟t in Lev. 1, let‟s go there now and look at the first object lesson God lays out for His people - the sacrificial system. This consisted of five different types of offerings – a burnt offering, a grain offering, a peace offering, a sin offering, and a guilt (trespass) offering. As we go through these offerings, be aware that I will be using the terms “sacrifice” and “offering” interchangeably. The offerings, for the most part, were costly; so whether you view it from the perspective of an offering or a sacrifice, it is the same concept.
What is this first offering we see mentioned in verse 2 when God says, “ . . . when any man of you brings an offering to the Lord, you shall bring your offering of the animals from the herd or the flock?” Offerings and sacrifices weren‟t a new concept to God‟s people, they go back to the early days of God‟s interaction with man, as far back as Cain and Abel in Gen. 4. But in Leviticus we see for the first time a systematic, comprehensive set of guidelines for the offerings / sacrifices. The word that is translated as “offering” has the basic idea of “drawing near.” So if the people wanted to “draw near” to their God, the sacrifices / offerings enabled them to do it. But to really appreciate what it meant to the Children of Israel to have a means of drawing near to God, we have to contrast it with Ex. 19. Let‟s turn there and see what the relationship between God and Israel was like when God gave the 10 Commandments.
10 And the LORD said to Moses, "Go to the people and consecrate them today and tomorrow. Have them wash their clothes
11 and be ready by the third day, because on that day the LORD will come down on Mount Sinai in the sight of all the people.
12 Put limits for the people around the mountain and tell them, 'Be careful that you do not go up the mountain or touch the foot of it. Whoever touches the mountain shall surely be put to death.
13 He shall surely be stoned or shot with arrows; not a hand is to be laid on him. Whether man or animal, he shall not be permitted to live.' Only when the ram's horn sounds a long blast may they go up to the mountain."
16 On the morning of the third day there was thunder and lightning, with a thick cloud over the mountain, and a very loud trumpet blast. Everyone in the camp trembled.
17 Then Moses led the people out of the camp to meet with God, and they stood at the foot of the mountain.
18 Mount Sinai was covered with smoke, because the LORD descended on it in fire. The smoke billowed up from it like smoke from a furnace, the whole mountain trembled violently,
19 and the sound of the trumpet grew louder and louder. Then Moses spoke and the voice of God answered him.
20 The LORD descended to the top of Mount Sinai and called Moses to the top of the mountain. So Moses went up
21 and the LORD said to him, "Go down and warn the people so they do not force their way through to see the LORD and many of them perish.
22 Even the priests, who approach the LORD, must consecrate themselves, or the LORD will break out against them."
23 Moses said to the LORD, "The people cannot come up Mount Sinai, because you yourself warned us, 'Put limits around the mountain and set it apart as holy.' "
How accessible was God in this chapter? Not very! In fact, if they got too close, they paid for it with their lives! What we need to appreciate is that that dynamic changed drastically in Leviticus when God laid out a program for them to utilize so they could get near to God without dying – and it started with the sacrifices. So that is the idea behind the word “offering,” it was a means by which people could “draw near” to God.
Now the first of these five offerings is referred to as a “burnt” offering. Read verse three again with me. “If his offering is a burnt offering from the heard, he shall offer it, a male without defect; he shall offer it at the doorway of the tent of meeting; that he may be accepted before the Lord.” Then in verse 10 we read, “If his offering is of the flocks – of the sheep or of the goats – as a burnt sacrifice . . .” and in verse 13, “And if the burnt sacrifice of his offering to the Lord is of birds . . .” Let me give you six particulars about this offering, some of them are unique to the burnt offering, some of them are held in common by others.
First of all, the burnt offering was a voluntary offering. If you are using a King James version of the Bible this comes out a little more clearly because it uses the phrase in verse three, “he shall offer it of his own free will.” This presents a little bit of a problem when you compare it to the NAS and the NIV which say the offering is so that “he may be accepted before the Lord.” Is it a “freewill offering,” or is it an “acceptable” offering? This difference in translation illustrates the complexity of translating Hebrew. The literal translation of this verse is, “If burnt offering gift from the herd, male, perfect, bring near toward the entrance of the tent of meeting to offer _____________________ before the Lord.”
There is no question about the word itself, it is the word ratzone, and it‟s translated in a variety of ways - “goodwill, favor, acceptance, desire, pleasure” and “to do as you please” or “to do as you desire.” So, which idea do you go with? Is the author‟s emphasis on the person bringing the sacrifice (“freewill”), or is it on the nature of the sacrifice (“acceptable”)? Both translations are legitimate as well as defensible, but I lean toward the idea of “freewill” – “He shall offer it of his own free will.”
The reason I believe this is because as you study the burnt offerings, there was no external compulsion requiring a person to do this. It was a voluntary offering. There are no rules specifying how often a person had to do this (though there were regulations mandating how often the nation had to do it), or what circumstances would require a burnt offering. The burnt offering was not like the sin offering of chapter four and the trespass offering of chapter five which covered known sins or even potential sins. In those cases, when you knew you had broken the rules, you made the sacrifice. But the burnt offering was done at the discretion of the one doing it. It was simply an expression of his desire to draw near to the Lord and be pleasing to God.
Second, it was costly. Think about what sacrificing a bull did to your net worth! There is a reason why the burnt offering was a “sacrifice.” Kind David expressed this truth when he offered a burnt offering that was offered to him for free. He said, “No, but I will surely buy it from you for a price, for I will not offer burnt offerings to the Lord my God which cost me nothing.” So David bought the threshing floor and the oxen for fifty shekels of silver.” The burnt offering was a costly, voluntary offering.
But you didn‟t have to be wealthy to bring this offering. If you weren’t wealthy, according to verse 10 you could bring a sheep or a goat, or if you were even poorer still, according to verse 14 you could bring a dove or a pigeon. The principle here is that your offering was according to your ability.
Third, it was narrow. What I mean by this is that not only were the guidelines very precise about the condition of the animal (male and without blemish), there was a limited number of animals you could choose from for the offering. The guidelines were very narrow. If you had a valuable horse you wanted to sacrifice, you couldn‟t give it! If you really wanted to make a sacrificial burnt offering to the Lord and wanted to sacrifice one of your valuable camels, you couldn‟t do it. You also couldn‟t sacrifice donkeys. Why were these valuable animals off the list of acceptable sacrifices, especially in light of how nicely they fit the bill of being costly to the giver? Because horses, donkeys, and camels were not only unclean, but also they were used by the pagans in their sacrificial systems! That is significant.
In this act, God is establishing a very clear division between His people and the pagan culture they were surrounded by. Let that phrase sink in. This is a timeless principle I want you to keep in the back of your mind because we are going to see it over and over in this book, and at some point we‟ll stop and look at how it plays out in our daily lives.
But for now, just remember the theme of Leviticus – God is holy, and He can be approached only in the way He prescribes. Just because you think you have something of value you can offer to God doesn‟t mean a thing. You can only give to God what He prescribes. And just to make sure we get the point, in Lev. 10, right after God lays out all the stipulations for fellowship with Him through the offerings and the priesthood, two priests got it in their mind to approach God in their own way and they paid for it with their lives! It is a very narrow path God had for His people.
Fourth, it was comprehensive. This particular offering is referred to as a “burnt” offering. The word “burnt” means “ascent,” and refers to the smoke that ascended toward heaven, but more than that, the entire animal was consumed by the fire. None of the animal being sacrificed was kept back for the priest, like some of the other offerings - the entire animal was consumed. This was different from the sin and guilt offerings because some of the animal in those offerings was carted out of the camp and burned outside the camp, but not in the case of this burnt offering. The one bringing it could stand there and watch the entire animal go up in smoke. There was nothing left.
In addition to this, you couldn‟t bring part of the animal and sacrifice it. Again, in contrast to the next two offerings, you could bring a portion and sacrifice it – but not with the burnt offering. You couldn‟t just throw a hindquarter up there and let that be your offering – it was the whole animal. And again, hold on to this thought because there is an important principle being illustrated here and we will be revisiting it.
Fifth, it was a substitutionary offering. Before we look at verse four where we see this matter of substitution, we need to go back to the Garden of Eden and recall God‟s actions when Adam and Eve sinned. What did God do in response to their sin? He killed an innocent animal and made clothing for them. In that act was established an eternal principle – sin is absolved only by the shedding of blood. The way the NT puts it is that “the wages of sin is death.” Any time you have sin, death follows. It doesn‟t matter if it was in the garden of Eden, or in the desert of Sinai, or in the days of Jesus, or this morning – there is an eternal principle that death always follows sin.
With that understanding, in verse 4 we read that the person bringing the sacrifice put his hand on the animal‟s head when he brought it to the door of the tabernacle. What was he doing? This was a symbolic gesture that transferred his sinfulness to the innocent animal. Why did he do this? Because blood had to be spilled! The offending, guilty party who could not draw near to God because of his sinfulness passed that guilt on to an innocent party, and then the innocent animal died instead of the one who deserved to die. And in that act, because of the blood being spilled, the person was brought into fellowship with his God. The bull or the goat was a substitutionary sacrifice.
Sixth, it was bloody. As we go through these sacrifices, you see blood everywhere. The blood was caught in a basin, and the, depending on the sacrifice, it was either sprinkled around the door, or poured out at the side of the altar, or poured on the four corners of the altar. We don‟t really appreciate how bloody this area was until we think about the size of the nation and realize that these offerings were taking place multiple times every day. God was making a very graphic point to His people, and that was that sin has serious consequences.
And seventh, it atoned for the sins of the one bringing the sacrifice as we see in verse 4. The word “atone” means “to cover.” In the Old Testament sense of the word, it doesn‟t mean to remove, only to cover. If I had a vase up here on the podium with me and threw a blanket over it, you would no longer be able to see it because it would be covered. Would the vase still be there? Sure. But it is only covered up. That is how we need to understand the idea of “atone” in these sacrifices. The sin was no longer visible to God because it was covered by the sacrifice, hence it no longer stood between the sinful person and the holy God. The holy God could be drawn near to.
I want us to close by looking at a short phrase in verse five. “And he shall slay the young bull before the Lord.” One of the dimensions of this sacrifice that we tend to overlook is that the person bringing the offering had to kill the animal himself. It didn‟t matter if you were squeamish about blood or not – you put the animal to death. Not only did you transfer your sinfulness to the animal through laying your hands on it, you were the means of its death. Let that sink in a moment - you were both the cause and the instrument of an innocent animal‟s death.
Several years ago Mel Gibson produced the very graphic movie The Passion of the Christ, and it is my understanding that when the part was being shot of the nails being pounded through Jesus‟ hands, it was a close-up and all you could see in the frame was Jesus‟ hand and the hands of a Roman soldier holding the hammer and spike. Guess which actor on the set was holding the hammer and spikes? Mel Gibson‟s!
That illustrates to me the reality of the burnt offering. That animal died at the hands of the sinner bringing it to the altar. He couldn‟t pass that off to the priest standing by. If it was a bird you were sacrificing, you ripped it in half with your own hands. There was nothing delicate about this offering – it was brutal and bloody! As we close in prayer, would you take a moment to reflect on the truth that Jesus was a burnt offering? Not that He burned, but when you think about the seven dimensions of the burnt offering, every one of them applies to Jesus.
It was voluntary
It was costly
It was narrow
It was comprehensive
It was substitutionary
It was bloody
It was atoning
And whose hands put Him to death?
The Sacrificial System – How To Draw Near To God
The Burnt Offering -Lev. 1
I‟d like you to turn in your Bibles to Leviticus chapter 1, and this morning we are going to start our study of the Old Testament sacrificial system. As I explained to you last week, this is not only a legitimate use of our time since all of God‟s Word is “profitable” according to 1 Tim. 3:16, it is valuable because of how it will enhance our appreciation of not only Jesus (especially as we study the sacrificial system and the priesthood) and what He has done for us but also of the New Covenant and life under the stipulations of grace.
Quick review: The theme of Leviticus is “the holiness of God.” Holy means “separate, set apart, or sacred.” The opposite of holy is common. Paper plates and plastic utensils are common. They are mass produced, used once, and then thrown out. But fine china and silver are sacred. We set them apart in special cabinets with glass doors and soft lighting. Since God is holy, only holy people can be in fellowship with Him. It doesn‟t matter if you lived 4,000 years ago in Israel, 2,000 years ago in Jerusalem, or if you are alive today – only holy people can be in fellowship with a holy God. But because holiness is somewhat abstract, in the book of Leviticus, God gives the nation of Israel a way to visualize holiness (remember the concept of object lessons). In the Old Testament system, holiness could actually be measured and viewed. The sacrifices, the offerings, the priesthood, and the laws concerning clean and unclean all served to quantify holiness. If you did all the “stuff,” you could be in communion and fellowship with a holy God.
Finally, let‟s say our memory project together. “Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, „Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them, „I am the LORD your God. You shall not do what is done in the land of Egypt where you lived, nor are you to do what is done in the land of Canaan where I am bringing you; you shall not walk in their statutes. You are to perform My judgments and keep My statutes, to live in accord with them; I am the LORD your God. So you shall keep My statutes and My judgments, by which a man may live if he does them; I am the LORD.‟”
So if you aren‟t in Lev. 1, let‟s go there now and look at the first object lesson God lays out for His people - the sacrificial system. This consisted of five different types of offerings – a burnt offering, a grain offering, a peace offering, a sin offering, and a guilt (trespass) offering. As we go through these offerings, be aware that I will be using the terms “sacrifice” and “offering” interchangeably. The offerings, for the most part, were costly; so whether you view it from the perspective of an offering or a sacrifice, it is the same concept.
What is this first offering we see mentioned in verse 2 when God says, “ . . . when any man of you brings an offering to the Lord, you shall bring your offering of the animals from the herd or the flock?” Offerings and sacrifices weren‟t a new concept to God‟s people, they go back to the early days of God‟s interaction with man, as far back as Cain and Abel in Gen. 4. But in Leviticus we see for the first time a systematic, comprehensive set of guidelines for the offerings / sacrifices. The word that is translated as “offering” has the basic idea of “drawing near.” So if the people wanted to “draw near” to their God, the sacrifices / offerings enabled them to do it. But to really appreciate what it meant to the Children of Israel to have a means of drawing near to God, we have to contrast it with Ex. 19. Let‟s turn there and see what the relationship between God and Israel was like when God gave the 10 Commandments.
10 And the LORD said to Moses, "Go to the people and consecrate them today and tomorrow. Have them wash their clothes
11 and be ready by the third day, because on that day the LORD will come down on Mount Sinai in the sight of all the people.
12 Put limits for the people around the mountain and tell them, 'Be careful that you do not go up the mountain or touch the foot of it. Whoever touches the mountain shall surely be put to death.
13 He shall surely be stoned or shot with arrows; not a hand is to be laid on him. Whether man or animal, he shall not be permitted to live.' Only when the ram's horn sounds a long blast may they go up to the mountain."
16 On the morning of the third day there was thunder and lightning, with a thick cloud over the mountain, and a very loud trumpet blast. Everyone in the camp trembled.
17 Then Moses led the people out of the camp to meet with God, and they stood at the foot of the mountain.
18 Mount Sinai was covered with smoke, because the LORD descended on it in fire. The smoke billowed up from it like smoke from a furnace, the whole mountain trembled violently,
19 and the sound of the trumpet grew louder and louder. Then Moses spoke and the voice of God answered him.
20 The LORD descended to the top of Mount Sinai and called Moses to the top of the mountain. So Moses went up
21 and the LORD said to him, "Go down and warn the people so they do not force their way through to see the LORD and many of them perish.
22 Even the priests, who approach the LORD, must consecrate themselves, or the LORD will break out against them."
23 Moses said to the LORD, "The people cannot come up Mount Sinai, because you yourself warned us, 'Put limits around the mountain and set it apart as holy.' "
How accessible was God in this chapter? Not very! In fact, if they got too close, they paid for it with their lives! What we need to appreciate is that that dynamic changed drastically in Leviticus when God laid out a program for them to utilize so they could get near to God without dying – and it started with the sacrifices. So that is the idea behind the word “offering,” it was a means by which people could “draw near” to God.
Now the first of these five offerings is referred to as a “burnt” offering. Read verse three again with me. “If his offering is a burnt offering from the heard, he shall offer it, a male without defect; he shall offer it at the doorway of the tent of meeting; that he may be accepted before the Lord.” Then in verse 10 we read, “If his offering is of the flocks – of the sheep or of the goats – as a burnt sacrifice . . .” and in verse 13, “And if the burnt sacrifice of his offering to the Lord is of birds . . .” Let me give you six particulars about this offering, some of them are unique to the burnt offering, some of them are held in common by others.
First of all, the burnt offering was a voluntary offering. If you are using a King James version of the Bible this comes out a little more clearly because it uses the phrase in verse three, “he shall offer it of his own free will.” This presents a little bit of a problem when you compare it to the NAS and the NIV which say the offering is so that “he may be accepted before the Lord.” Is it a “freewill offering,” or is it an “acceptable” offering? This difference in translation illustrates the complexity of translating Hebrew. The literal translation of this verse is, “If burnt offering gift from the herd, male, perfect, bring near toward the entrance of the tent of meeting to offer _____________________ before the Lord.”
There is no question about the word itself, it is the word ratzone, and it‟s translated in a variety of ways - “goodwill, favor, acceptance, desire, pleasure” and “to do as you please” or “to do as you desire.” So, which idea do you go with? Is the author‟s emphasis on the person bringing the sacrifice (“freewill”), or is it on the nature of the sacrifice (“acceptable”)? Both translations are legitimate as well as defensible, but I lean toward the idea of “freewill” – “He shall offer it of his own free will.”
The reason I believe this is because as you study the burnt offerings, there was no external compulsion requiring a person to do this. It was a voluntary offering. There are no rules specifying how often a person had to do this (though there were regulations mandating how often the nation had to do it), or what circumstances would require a burnt offering. The burnt offering was not like the sin offering of chapter four and the trespass offering of chapter five which covered known sins or even potential sins. In those cases, when you knew you had broken the rules, you made the sacrifice. But the burnt offering was done at the discretion of the one doing it. It was simply an expression of his desire to draw near to the Lord and be pleasing to God.
Second, it was costly. Think about what sacrificing a bull did to your net worth! There is a reason why the burnt offering was a “sacrifice.” Kind David expressed this truth when he offered a burnt offering that was offered to him for free. He said, “No, but I will surely buy it from you for a price, for I will not offer burnt offerings to the Lord my God which cost me nothing.” So David bought the threshing floor and the oxen for fifty shekels of silver.” The burnt offering was a costly, voluntary offering.
But you didn‟t have to be wealthy to bring this offering. If you weren’t wealthy, according to verse 10 you could bring a sheep or a goat, or if you were even poorer still, according to verse 14 you could bring a dove or a pigeon. The principle here is that your offering was according to your ability.
Third, it was narrow. What I mean by this is that not only were the guidelines very precise about the condition of the animal (male and without blemish), there was a limited number of animals you could choose from for the offering. The guidelines were very narrow. If you had a valuable horse you wanted to sacrifice, you couldn‟t give it! If you really wanted to make a sacrificial burnt offering to the Lord and wanted to sacrifice one of your valuable camels, you couldn‟t do it. You also couldn‟t sacrifice donkeys. Why were these valuable animals off the list of acceptable sacrifices, especially in light of how nicely they fit the bill of being costly to the giver? Because horses, donkeys, and camels were not only unclean, but also they were used by the pagans in their sacrificial systems! That is significant.
In this act, God is establishing a very clear division between His people and the pagan culture they were surrounded by. Let that phrase sink in. This is a timeless principle I want you to keep in the back of your mind because we are going to see it over and over in this book, and at some point we‟ll stop and look at how it plays out in our daily lives.
But for now, just remember the theme of Leviticus – God is holy, and He can be approached only in the way He prescribes. Just because you think you have something of value you can offer to God doesn‟t mean a thing. You can only give to God what He prescribes. And just to make sure we get the point, in Lev. 10, right after God lays out all the stipulations for fellowship with Him through the offerings and the priesthood, two priests got it in their mind to approach God in their own way and they paid for it with their lives! It is a very narrow path God had for His people.
Fourth, it was comprehensive. This particular offering is referred to as a “burnt” offering. The word “burnt” means “ascent,” and refers to the smoke that ascended toward heaven, but more than that, the entire animal was consumed by the fire. None of the animal being sacrificed was kept back for the priest, like some of the other offerings - the entire animal was consumed. This was different from the sin and guilt offerings because some of the animal in those offerings was carted out of the camp and burned outside the camp, but not in the case of this burnt offering. The one bringing it could stand there and watch the entire animal go up in smoke. There was nothing left.
In addition to this, you couldn‟t bring part of the animal and sacrifice it. Again, in contrast to the next two offerings, you could bring a portion and sacrifice it – but not with the burnt offering. You couldn‟t just throw a hindquarter up there and let that be your offering – it was the whole animal. And again, hold on to this thought because there is an important principle being illustrated here and we will be revisiting it.
Fifth, it was a substitutionary offering. Before we look at verse four where we see this matter of substitution, we need to go back to the Garden of Eden and recall God‟s actions when Adam and Eve sinned. What did God do in response to their sin? He killed an innocent animal and made clothing for them. In that act was established an eternal principle – sin is absolved only by the shedding of blood. The way the NT puts it is that “the wages of sin is death.” Any time you have sin, death follows. It doesn‟t matter if it was in the garden of Eden, or in the desert of Sinai, or in the days of Jesus, or this morning – there is an eternal principle that death always follows sin.
With that understanding, in verse 4 we read that the person bringing the sacrifice put his hand on the animal‟s head when he brought it to the door of the tabernacle. What was he doing? This was a symbolic gesture that transferred his sinfulness to the innocent animal. Why did he do this? Because blood had to be spilled! The offending, guilty party who could not draw near to God because of his sinfulness passed that guilt on to an innocent party, and then the innocent animal died instead of the one who deserved to die. And in that act, because of the blood being spilled, the person was brought into fellowship with his God. The bull or the goat was a substitutionary sacrifice.
Sixth, it was bloody. As we go through these sacrifices, you see blood everywhere. The blood was caught in a basin, and the, depending on the sacrifice, it was either sprinkled around the door, or poured out at the side of the altar, or poured on the four corners of the altar. We don‟t really appreciate how bloody this area was until we think about the size of the nation and realize that these offerings were taking place multiple times every day. God was making a very graphic point to His people, and that was that sin has serious consequences.
And seventh, it atoned for the sins of the one bringing the sacrifice as we see in verse 4. The word “atone” means “to cover.” In the Old Testament sense of the word, it doesn‟t mean to remove, only to cover. If I had a vase up here on the podium with me and threw a blanket over it, you would no longer be able to see it because it would be covered. Would the vase still be there? Sure. But it is only covered up. That is how we need to understand the idea of “atone” in these sacrifices. The sin was no longer visible to God because it was covered by the sacrifice, hence it no longer stood between the sinful person and the holy God. The holy God could be drawn near to.
I want us to close by looking at a short phrase in verse five. “And he shall slay the young bull before the Lord.” One of the dimensions of this sacrifice that we tend to overlook is that the person bringing the offering had to kill the animal himself. It didn‟t matter if you were squeamish about blood or not – you put the animal to death. Not only did you transfer your sinfulness to the animal through laying your hands on it, you were the means of its death. Let that sink in a moment - you were both the cause and the instrument of an innocent animal‟s death.
Several years ago Mel Gibson produced the very graphic movie The Passion of the Christ, and it is my understanding that when the part was being shot of the nails being pounded through Jesus‟ hands, it was a close-up and all you could see in the frame was Jesus‟ hand and the hands of a Roman soldier holding the hammer and spike. Guess which actor on the set was holding the hammer and spikes? Mel Gibson‟s!
That illustrates to me the reality of the burnt offering. That animal died at the hands of the sinner bringing it to the altar. He couldn‟t pass that off to the priest standing by. If it was a bird you were sacrificing, you ripped it in half with your own hands. There was nothing delicate about this offering – it was brutal and bloody! As we close in prayer, would you take a moment to reflect on the truth that Jesus was a burnt offering? Not that He burned, but when you think about the seven dimensions of the burnt offering, every one of them applies to Jesus.
It was voluntary
It was costly
It was narrow
It was comprehensive
It was substitutionary
It was bloody
It was atoning
And whose hands put Him to death?
Introduction to Leviticus
Studies in Leviticus
Leviticus is not an easy book to read. One of the first things you will notice as you read the book that there is lots of repetition about things we don‟t do, nor are we expected or required to do them! Sacrifices, clean and unclean food, rituals for childbirth, priests, rituals for leprosy, rituals for death, feasts, rituals for mildew, rituals for offerings, and on and on the list goes.
Between the repetition and the emphasis on the culturally distant, at first glance there doesn't seem to be much there to hold our attention - much less apply to our daily lives. However, there are messages in these 27 chapters that are of great importance to us.
Leviticus in a Nutshell
The theme of Leviticus is “the holiness of God.” The word “holy” is used 57 times, and generally speaking, holy means “sacred,” “separate,” or “set apart.” That may be a little vague, so let‟s look at it this way. Holy is the opposite of common. If we were to apply it to dishes; paper plates, Styrofoam, and plastic utensils would be “common;” and fine china, crystal, and genuine silver utensils would be “sacred,” or “set apart,” or even “holy.” That is the root idea behind “holy.” Unfortunately, holiness is an abstract idea. If you were to ask three different people to describe it, you would most likely get three different answers.
Because of this, in the book of Leviticus, God gives His chosen people a series of object lesson that quantify holiness. In other words, He makes it tangible – it is attainable. So even though God is separate and not common (holy), by following the object lessons of Leviticus, God could be approached and communed with. The distant God could be brought near.
One other thing to remember about Leviticus is that it is very closely connected with Exodus. In Exodus, God chooses, delivers, miraculously provides for, and establishes Israel as a nation. The book ends with the people building a tabernacle to house God‟s glory, and in Ex. 40:34 we read that God filled the tabernacle with His glory, visible proof that God was near and present.
But that is only half the formula because now the sinful, unholy, rebellious people, separated from a holy God, needed access to their God. How could they do that? There were two critical things that had to happen. First of all, they had to be made aware of their sin. They had to know what was acceptable and what was unacceptable. And second, they had to then have a way to deal with that sin. Everything you read in the book of Leviticus has these two issues as their foundation – the knowledge of sin and then its antidote (cf. touching a dead body). We know this is true because of what Paul tells us explicitly in Rom. 3:20 when he says, “for through the law comes the knowledge of sin.” He then elaborates on that in Gal. 3:24 when he says, “Therefore the Law has become our tutor [education] to lead us to Christ [antidote], that we may be justified by faith.”
Memory Project: Lev. 18:1-5
Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, “Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them, „I am the LORD your God. You shall not do what is done in the land of Egypt where you lived, nor are you to do what is done in the land of Canaan where I am bringing you; you shall not walk in their statutes. You are to perform My judgments and keep My statutes, to live in accord with them; I am the LORD your God. So you shall keep My statutes and My judgments, by which a man may live if he does them; I am the LORD.‟”
Schematic of the book:
Chapters 1-16: How To Obtain Fellowship With God – Purification
Chs. 1-7: The sacrificial system – “how to draw near to God”
Chs. 8-10: The priestly system – “the mediators between God and man”
Chs. 11-15: The fellowship system – “clean versus unclean”
Ch. 16: The Day of Atonement – “the annual removal of sin”
Chapters 17-25: How To Maintain Fellowship With God – Sanctification
Chs. 17-20: Concerning daily living
Chs. 21-22: Concerning the priesthood
Chs. 23-24: Concerning the feasts
Ch. 25: Concerning the sabbatical and jubilee years
Summary of section #1 – sacrifice and purification culminate in atonement atonement
Summary of section #2 – sanctification culminates in rest
Chapters 26-27: Appendices
Ch. 26: Blessings for obedience and punishments for disobedience
Ch. 27: Guidelines concerning vows
Warnings about Leviticus
The follower of Christ today is faced with a tricky situation when he starts to interpret and apply the book of Leviticus. We acknowledge with Paul in 2 Tim. 3:16 that “all scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable.” We also acknowledge with Paul in 1 Cor. 10 that all the things that are recorded for us in the OT “happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction.” But what do we do with all the regulations in Leviticus? Do they apply to us today? Do we have to follow them? If so, why, and if not, why not?
Here is the principle I want you to keep in mind as we go through this book. We can‟t confuse the object lesson with the spiritual reality it represents. Let me say it again. We can‟t confuse the object lesson with the spiritual reality it represents. In the book of Leviticus, the visible and tangible always points toward the invisible and intangible. The physical leaven / yeast that grows and permeates the entire loaf of bread is an object lesson that illustrates the nature of sin (1 Cor. 5 and Gal. 5). Yeast is not intrinsically evil. The meat of the young goat boiled in it‟s mother‟s milk is an object lesson only. There is a bigger spiritual reality that God was drawing their attention to. It‟s not like something happened to the goat meat at the molecular level if it was boiled in it‟s own mother‟s milk that didn‟t happen if it was boiled in some other goat‟s milk.
How do we know that is true? Because of what Jesus said in Mt. 5:17-18. “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill. 18 "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished.” Circle the words “fulfill” and “accomplish.” “Fulfill” means “to give the complete or true meaning of something.” It means “to provide the true significance of something.” The word “accomplished” means “to come into existence,” and indicates that something was missing, it is still outstanding. What this tells us is that the law in its Old Testament form was incomplete. It was insufficient. It was missing something. The way the author of Hebrews puts it in chapter 8 is that the priesthood and legal system served as “a copy and shadow of the heavenly things.” Remember, the physical points to the spiritual. He goes on to say in verse 7, “For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion for a second.” That is strong language! And then he ends the chapter in verse 13 by saying, “When He said, „A new covenant,‟ He has made the first obsolete.” The point is that eventually, the object lessons lost their value. They are not for us today.
What I want you to remember as we go through this wonderful book is that if you focus too closely on the particulars, you will miss the big picture. If you look at all the dietary laws and all you see are principle for healthy eating, you have just missed the point. There is something bigger going on. I have a pastor friend who lives in Red Hook, and he was telling me about his friend‟s house on Long Island. Apparently it was on the beach and had an amazing view, and the entire house was built around the great room that had a 7‟ X 11‟ window looking out at the bay. He would bring guests to this window and encourage them to just stand there and soak it in.
Let‟s say that I am the guest and he has just brought me into the great room, and we are standing there in front of the window and there is a gorgeous sunset – I mean the sky is on fire and there is a palette of colors in the sky no human could ever reproduce. And I walk up to the window and say, “Did you use cherry to trim this window out?” He says “yes, but look at that sky!” So I say, “This is incredible woodwork. Did you mill it yourself, or have it custom built?” He says, “I milled it myself, but look at this sunset. Have you ever seen such beautiful colors?” So I say, “I can‟t believe the patina on this wood. How did you get it? Did you use beeswax, or linseed oil?” He says, “It‟s neither – it‟s just matte varnish, but you really need to see this sunset before it is gone.” So I say, “How did you attach it to the wall? I don‟t see any nail holes – did you glue it up?” And he says, “No, I worked really hard to make sure the putty was an exact match.” Wouldn‟t that be sad? Yes, the woodwork is beautiful and intricate, but that is nothing compared to the sunset.
And that is the danger we need to be on the lookout for as we study the book of Leviticus – focusing on the particulars and not the big picture. Do people do this today? Absolutely! In my opinion, this is the weakness of the entire Messianic Jewish movement – a fascination with the Old Testament ritual which Jesus, Paul, and the author of Hebrews all said was deficient. There are women who will not be intimate with their husbands for 40 days after they give birth to a male child, and they won‟t be intimate for 80 days after the birth of a female child – because of the prohibitions in Leviticus. There are people who won‟t eat shrimp because of the prohibition in Leviticus. Are these sinful things? No, but they are illustrative of a deficient understanding of the whole of scripture. We have to be very careful about focusing on the woodwork around the window and missing the beautiful sunset.
Why did God see fit to include Leviticus in our Bible, especially since its focus is on a system of approaching God that is no longer relevant? Three reasons come to mind.
First of all, Leviticus reveals a holy God who can be approached only in the way He prescribes. You cannot come to God on your own terms. I don‟t care how smart you are, or how logical or illogical you think the Bible is, if you want to have a relationship with God, you are going to have to do it His way! That is the sunset we are going to be focusing on.
Secondly, Leviticus beautifully and simply illustrates complex spiritual truths. For instance, when Jesus died on the cross, He was taking care of our sins. Expressed that way, it doesn‟t say a lot. But when we study the scapegoat that was released into an uninhabited wilderness on the day of Atonement – what Jesus did with my sins when He was on the cross suddenly comes alive.
Finally, Leviticus forces us to have a greater appreciation of the New Covenant, enacted at Calvary, that conclusively deals with sin. My love for Jesus and His grace and the sufficiency of His sacrifice is fueled by and in proportion to my awareness of the ponderous, complex, deficient, Mosaic system.
Leviticus is not an easy book to read. One of the first things you will notice as you read the book that there is lots of repetition about things we don‟t do, nor are we expected or required to do them! Sacrifices, clean and unclean food, rituals for childbirth, priests, rituals for leprosy, rituals for death, feasts, rituals for mildew, rituals for offerings, and on and on the list goes.
Between the repetition and the emphasis on the culturally distant, at first glance there doesn't seem to be much there to hold our attention - much less apply to our daily lives. However, there are messages in these 27 chapters that are of great importance to us.
Leviticus in a Nutshell
The theme of Leviticus is “the holiness of God.” The word “holy” is used 57 times, and generally speaking, holy means “sacred,” “separate,” or “set apart.” That may be a little vague, so let‟s look at it this way. Holy is the opposite of common. If we were to apply it to dishes; paper plates, Styrofoam, and plastic utensils would be “common;” and fine china, crystal, and genuine silver utensils would be “sacred,” or “set apart,” or even “holy.” That is the root idea behind “holy.” Unfortunately, holiness is an abstract idea. If you were to ask three different people to describe it, you would most likely get three different answers.
Because of this, in the book of Leviticus, God gives His chosen people a series of object lesson that quantify holiness. In other words, He makes it tangible – it is attainable. So even though God is separate and not common (holy), by following the object lessons of Leviticus, God could be approached and communed with. The distant God could be brought near.
One other thing to remember about Leviticus is that it is very closely connected with Exodus. In Exodus, God chooses, delivers, miraculously provides for, and establishes Israel as a nation. The book ends with the people building a tabernacle to house God‟s glory, and in Ex. 40:34 we read that God filled the tabernacle with His glory, visible proof that God was near and present.
But that is only half the formula because now the sinful, unholy, rebellious people, separated from a holy God, needed access to their God. How could they do that? There were two critical things that had to happen. First of all, they had to be made aware of their sin. They had to know what was acceptable and what was unacceptable. And second, they had to then have a way to deal with that sin. Everything you read in the book of Leviticus has these two issues as their foundation – the knowledge of sin and then its antidote (cf. touching a dead body). We know this is true because of what Paul tells us explicitly in Rom. 3:20 when he says, “for through the law comes the knowledge of sin.” He then elaborates on that in Gal. 3:24 when he says, “Therefore the Law has become our tutor [education] to lead us to Christ [antidote], that we may be justified by faith.”
Memory Project: Lev. 18:1-5
Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, “Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them, „I am the LORD your God. You shall not do what is done in the land of Egypt where you lived, nor are you to do what is done in the land of Canaan where I am bringing you; you shall not walk in their statutes. You are to perform My judgments and keep My statutes, to live in accord with them; I am the LORD your God. So you shall keep My statutes and My judgments, by which a man may live if he does them; I am the LORD.‟”
Schematic of the book:
Chapters 1-16: How To Obtain Fellowship With God – Purification
Chs. 1-7: The sacrificial system – “how to draw near to God”
Chs. 8-10: The priestly system – “the mediators between God and man”
Chs. 11-15: The fellowship system – “clean versus unclean”
Ch. 16: The Day of Atonement – “the annual removal of sin”
Chapters 17-25: How To Maintain Fellowship With God – Sanctification
Chs. 17-20: Concerning daily living
Chs. 21-22: Concerning the priesthood
Chs. 23-24: Concerning the feasts
Ch. 25: Concerning the sabbatical and jubilee years
Summary of section #1 – sacrifice and purification culminate in atonement atonement
Summary of section #2 – sanctification culminates in rest
Chapters 26-27: Appendices
Ch. 26: Blessings for obedience and punishments for disobedience
Ch. 27: Guidelines concerning vows
Warnings about Leviticus
The follower of Christ today is faced with a tricky situation when he starts to interpret and apply the book of Leviticus. We acknowledge with Paul in 2 Tim. 3:16 that “all scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable.” We also acknowledge with Paul in 1 Cor. 10 that all the things that are recorded for us in the OT “happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction.” But what do we do with all the regulations in Leviticus? Do they apply to us today? Do we have to follow them? If so, why, and if not, why not?
Here is the principle I want you to keep in mind as we go through this book. We can‟t confuse the object lesson with the spiritual reality it represents. Let me say it again. We can‟t confuse the object lesson with the spiritual reality it represents. In the book of Leviticus, the visible and tangible always points toward the invisible and intangible. The physical leaven / yeast that grows and permeates the entire loaf of bread is an object lesson that illustrates the nature of sin (1 Cor. 5 and Gal. 5). Yeast is not intrinsically evil. The meat of the young goat boiled in it‟s mother‟s milk is an object lesson only. There is a bigger spiritual reality that God was drawing their attention to. It‟s not like something happened to the goat meat at the molecular level if it was boiled in it‟s own mother‟s milk that didn‟t happen if it was boiled in some other goat‟s milk.
How do we know that is true? Because of what Jesus said in Mt. 5:17-18. “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill. 18 "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished.” Circle the words “fulfill” and “accomplish.” “Fulfill” means “to give the complete or true meaning of something.” It means “to provide the true significance of something.” The word “accomplished” means “to come into existence,” and indicates that something was missing, it is still outstanding. What this tells us is that the law in its Old Testament form was incomplete. It was insufficient. It was missing something. The way the author of Hebrews puts it in chapter 8 is that the priesthood and legal system served as “a copy and shadow of the heavenly things.” Remember, the physical points to the spiritual. He goes on to say in verse 7, “For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion for a second.” That is strong language! And then he ends the chapter in verse 13 by saying, “When He said, „A new covenant,‟ He has made the first obsolete.” The point is that eventually, the object lessons lost their value. They are not for us today.
What I want you to remember as we go through this wonderful book is that if you focus too closely on the particulars, you will miss the big picture. If you look at all the dietary laws and all you see are principle for healthy eating, you have just missed the point. There is something bigger going on. I have a pastor friend who lives in Red Hook, and he was telling me about his friend‟s house on Long Island. Apparently it was on the beach and had an amazing view, and the entire house was built around the great room that had a 7‟ X 11‟ window looking out at the bay. He would bring guests to this window and encourage them to just stand there and soak it in.
Let‟s say that I am the guest and he has just brought me into the great room, and we are standing there in front of the window and there is a gorgeous sunset – I mean the sky is on fire and there is a palette of colors in the sky no human could ever reproduce. And I walk up to the window and say, “Did you use cherry to trim this window out?” He says “yes, but look at that sky!” So I say, “This is incredible woodwork. Did you mill it yourself, or have it custom built?” He says, “I milled it myself, but look at this sunset. Have you ever seen such beautiful colors?” So I say, “I can‟t believe the patina on this wood. How did you get it? Did you use beeswax, or linseed oil?” He says, “It‟s neither – it‟s just matte varnish, but you really need to see this sunset before it is gone.” So I say, “How did you attach it to the wall? I don‟t see any nail holes – did you glue it up?” And he says, “No, I worked really hard to make sure the putty was an exact match.” Wouldn‟t that be sad? Yes, the woodwork is beautiful and intricate, but that is nothing compared to the sunset.
And that is the danger we need to be on the lookout for as we study the book of Leviticus – focusing on the particulars and not the big picture. Do people do this today? Absolutely! In my opinion, this is the weakness of the entire Messianic Jewish movement – a fascination with the Old Testament ritual which Jesus, Paul, and the author of Hebrews all said was deficient. There are women who will not be intimate with their husbands for 40 days after they give birth to a male child, and they won‟t be intimate for 80 days after the birth of a female child – because of the prohibitions in Leviticus. There are people who won‟t eat shrimp because of the prohibition in Leviticus. Are these sinful things? No, but they are illustrative of a deficient understanding of the whole of scripture. We have to be very careful about focusing on the woodwork around the window and missing the beautiful sunset.
Why did God see fit to include Leviticus in our Bible, especially since its focus is on a system of approaching God that is no longer relevant? Three reasons come to mind.
First of all, Leviticus reveals a holy God who can be approached only in the way He prescribes. You cannot come to God on your own terms. I don‟t care how smart you are, or how logical or illogical you think the Bible is, if you want to have a relationship with God, you are going to have to do it His way! That is the sunset we are going to be focusing on.
Secondly, Leviticus beautifully and simply illustrates complex spiritual truths. For instance, when Jesus died on the cross, He was taking care of our sins. Expressed that way, it doesn‟t say a lot. But when we study the scapegoat that was released into an uninhabited wilderness on the day of Atonement – what Jesus did with my sins when He was on the cross suddenly comes alive.
Finally, Leviticus forces us to have a greater appreciation of the New Covenant, enacted at Calvary, that conclusively deals with sin. My love for Jesus and His grace and the sufficiency of His sacrifice is fueled by and in proportion to my awareness of the ponderous, complex, deficient, Mosaic system.
Monday, January 3, 2011
Structural Steel
Structural Steel
2 Cor. 4:6-10
I’d like you to turn to 2 Cor. 4 this morning, and I want to speak to you about structural steel. Structural steel is what large buildings and skyscrapers are constructed of. It is the skeleton that holds the entire structure together and erect. For thousands of years mankind was limited in the size and height of what he could build, but with the advent of steel, everything changed. Steel is easily and quickly manufactured whereas wood takes years to be replenished. Steel is stronger than wood, it doesn’t burn, and it’s more flexible and easier to use than stone. So when the steel smelting process was perfected by Bessemer in the late 1800’s, its easy to see why steel became such a huge industry and why architecture was changed forever.
What does structural steel have to do with you and me? Well, in the same way that steel gives strength and stability to buildings, we need something to give us strength and stability in our lives. Steel is what allows a skyscraper to flex and sway during a hurricane (sometimes as much as 3 – 5 feet) without collapsing. Steel is what keeps a submarine from imploding when it is under 1.25 metric tons of pressure per square centimeter on a deep dive.
I don’t know about you, but those ideas appeal to me, because you don’t have to be alive for very many years before you figure out that life can be hard. This is why we sing the song, “It’s not an easy road I am called on to travel, for many are the troubles we bear.” We struggle with our spouse, we struggle with our children, we are under pressure from our bosses, we deal with debilitating physical problems, we have too much month left at the end of the paycheck, we suffer from the decline of our culture and nation, we are faced with tragedy in the lives of those around us, and the list could go on and on. I heard recently about a young mother who swerved to avoid hitting a dear and had a terrible wreck. She will probably be in a coma for months, if not years, and then face extensive rehabilitation, if she ever revives. How is her husband and five children supposed to cope with that?
As Job puts it, “ . . . evil does not spring from the soil, and trouble does not sprout from the earth. People are born for trouble as readily as sparks fly up from a fire.” His point is that difficulty and trouble and suffering and hardship and pressure is inextricably entwined with the human experience. No one is exempt. So as followers of Christ, how are we supposed to handle the pressures and stresses of life that we don’t have any control over?
This is where structural steel comes into play, and the Apostle Paul refers to it in 2 Cor. 4:6-10.
6 For God, who said, "Let there be light in the darkness," has made this light shine in our hearts so we could know the glory of God that is seen in the face of Jesus Christ. 7 We now have this light shining in our hearts, but we ourselves are like fragile clay jars containing this great treasure. This makes it clear that our great power is from God, not from ourselves. 8 We are pressed on every side by troubles, but we are not crushed. We are perplexed, but not driven to despair. 9 We are hunted down, but never abandoned by God. We get knocked down, but we are not destroyed. 10 Through suffering, our bodies continue to share in the death of Jesus so that the life of Jesus may also be seen in our bodies.
Even though Paul doesn’t use the phrase “structural steel” in these verses, he makes reference in verses six and seven to something on the inside that keeps us from collapsing or imploding when life hits us hard. So even though I can’t explain to you the “why” of difficulty, I can give you three truths that will add some steel to your life. The first piece of structural steel I want you to see is found in Jer. 31:3, and it is the truth that God’s love for me is everlasting.
I. God’s Love For Me is Everlasting - Jer. 31:3
When life hits us hard, we are often tempted to wonder whether or not God really does love us. Maybe you don’t personally struggle at this level, but I assure you that many, many other people do. The Bible teaches unequivocally that “God is love,” and it is impossible for many people to reconcile a loving God with suffering and difficulty. If God really is a loving God, why does He let little girls be sexually abused by their uncle? The reason we think this way is because from a purely human perspective, love is most often demonstrated by acts of kindness and generosity and self-sacrifice. From a human perspective, acts of malice or evil or ill will are indicative of a lack of love. Because of this kind of thinking, when something tragic happens to us, our first inclination many times is to interpret that event through a purely human lens. And if we make that mistake, we will draw some very dangerous conclusions about God.
So the first piece of steel I want to share with you today is found in Jer. 31:3, which says, "The LORD appeared to him from afar, saying, "I have loved you with an everlasting love; Therefore I have drawn you with loving kindness." The point Jeremiah is making in this verse is that as he reflects on the history of Israel, he can see that God has a history of loving actions toward His people. It was an “everlasting love.” They were chosen out of all the nations of the earth to be God's special people. They were delivered from Egypt. They were sustained in the wilderness. They were miraculously installed in the Promised Land, they were providentially protected in their early years as a nation. So as far as Jeremiah could recall, God had a history of loving actions toward the nation of Israel.
And what is of great importance to us is that at the time Jeremiah wrote this, the nation of Israel was going through some very distressing times. These were not the glory days of Israel's history. Israel was not some wealthy, strong, unified, world power. They were weak and harassed and the rulers were corrupt and the economy was bad. Injustice was prevalent. And in that context, God comes to Jeremiah and says, "I have loved you with an everlasting love." God’s message to Jeremiah in this passage is that the presence of suffering / difficulty /the existence of injustice / hardship does not indicate a lack of God's love.
This is the kind of perspective we need to have, and when you think about it, it is a mature perspective, isn’t it? Think with me for a moment about a 6 year old who doesn’t want to go to school on a beautiful fall day. It is warm and sunny outside, he has been building a fort in the woods, and he has a new puppy he wants to spend the day with; and from his six year old perspective there is nothing worse, nothing more unfair, than being forced to sit still in a hot school room, with Mrs. McGregor, and memorize multiplication tables. In fact, in his six year old mind, he is going to perceive his father’s adamancy that he go to school as being unloving. And he may even tell his father, “When I’m a Daddy, I’m not going to make my children go to school.” This is typical of six year olds – they perceive enforced hardship as being unloving. Of course from our mature perspective as adults, we know that the unloving thing to do is to give in to the child’s desires.
We need to learn how to apply this perspective to God and His actions toward us. We need to grow up in our understanding of what love looks like. As Paul says in 1 Cor. 13:11, “When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, and I reasoned like a child. When I became a man [when I matured, when I grew up], I put childish ways behind me.” A mature perspective of love understands that trial and difficulty is not indicative of a lack of love.
If we think about it, regardless of our current difficult circumstances, we can recall the same kind of actions on God's part toward us, that Jeremiah could recall. God chose us for salvation. He delivered us from the power and penalty of sin. He has providentially protected and provided for us. In fact, as far back as we can see God had demonstrated his love for us. And we need to be careful to remember that the presence of tribulation in our lives does not indicate a lack of God's love (see also Rom. 8:31-39).
So our first piece of steel is that God’s love for me is everlasting. Look with me now at Romans 8 where we are going to see our second piece of steel. In verses 28 and 29 we see that God has an objective for my life, and that is that I become more and more like His Son, Jesus.
II. God’s Purpose For Me is Christlikeness
In verses 28 and 29 we read, “And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. [Please don’t ever stop right here! The “good” of verse 28 is found in verse 29] For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son that He might be the first-born among many brethren; 30 and whom He predestined, these He also called; and whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.”
God has an objective for your life, and that objective is that you become more and more like His Son, Jesus. God is not content with you the way you are right now! Let that sink in. Let me make this real personal. God is not content with Murray in his present condition. He wants Murray to become more and more like His Son, Jesus. I don’t care how long you have been saved, I don’t care how mature you think you are, you have areas in your life where you need to grow to be more like Christ.
Because of this truth, because of God’s objective for us, God is constantly working in our lives to “conform us to the image of His Son,” to use Paul’s language. God wants Billy to look less like Billy and more like Jesus. God wants Loretta to look less like Loretta and more like Jesus. He has a variety of tools He can use to accomplish this – parents, spouse, pastor, obnoxious co-worker, children, in-laws, boss, the economy, your neighbor, the list is practically endless – one of them being difficulty. God often uses difficulty to conform us to the image of His Son.
Think with me about the significance of the words “all things work together for good.” “All things” is somewhat comprehensive, isn’t it? Does it include things like rape and unwanted pregnancy? Is that one of those “all things” that “work together for good?” I heard about a godly 18 year old young lady who was raped and impregnated. And now she is bearing in her body a constant reminder of the horror of that incident. And when this child is born, and she is not putting it up for adoption, she will daily be reminded of the trauma every time she looks at her baby. Does Rom. 8:28-29 apply to situations like this? Absolutely! Here is a truth worth writing down. “God will take you where you do not want to go, in order to produce in you what you could not achieve on your own.” Paul Tripp.
So what does this have to do with having reinforcing steel in our lives when going through difficult times. Here is the connection. Purpose in life is what makes the difference between living and simply existing. Having a sense of purpose takes us from simply weathering the storm to actually battling our way through it and coming out on the other side. Having a clear cut sense of purpose is what gives sense and rationality to the difficulty. And we need to remember that God has a purpose in mind for us when difficult times come – He is using this difficulty to make me more like His Son Jesus. This truth is another piece of steel in your life. There is purpose behind the difficulty – it is not random. There is purpose behind the diagnosis of fibromyalgia. There is purpose behind the child drowning. There is purpose behind the hunting accident that takes a young man’s life. All things work together for good because they conform us to the image of Christ.
I read a very interesting illustration of how this works in a prisoner’s account of life in a Nazi death camp. Every day the Jews of this particular camp were forced to do backbreaking, disgusting labor by combining a large city’s raw sewage and garbage. They would distill this to make a fuel additive. And even worse than the nauseating smell was the realization that they were fueling the Nazi war machine. And the man who was telling about this said that even though it was inhumane beyond our ability to comprehend, the men of the prison camp did their work every day. One night the Allies bombed the plant where this fuel was made, so the next morning the camp commandant had them spend the day simply loading carts with sand, carting it to the other side of the compound, and unloading it. And that was it for the day. The next morning, he had the men move the sand back to its original place, and that was it for the day. The next morning, he had them move it back to the other side of the compound - and they were through for the day.
After several days of this purposeless work, men in the compound started breaking down mentally. Dozens actually committing suicide. Some would attempt to escape from the prison in broad daylight, only to be gunned down by the guards. Some men would throw themselves into the electrified fences only to be electrocuted in a terrible sizzling flash. And the man who was giving this account said the reason these men started committing suicide was because the camp commandant took away their sense of purpose. He said that as vile as the work was in the sewage plant, and as repulsive as it was to the men to actually be helping the enemy, at least there was a rationale and a purpose behind what they were doing, and they were able to live. They didn’t have that when they were moving sand. And when the sensibility of their labor and their purposefulness was removed, they lost their will to live.
As unpleasant as difficulty is, there is purpose behind it. There are some things you will never learn when life is good and everything is going the way you want it to. As Charles Stanley says, “In the valley, we discover the character of God in a way we never would on the mountain peak.” Those of you who have been through the valley know what he is talking about. Peter talks about this truth in 1 Peter 4:13 when he talks about “sharing in the sufferings of Christ” and how suffering creates a closeness with Jesus and an identification with Jesus that non-sufferers don’t have.
Difficulty has the potential to conform us to the image of Christ, or to change us from being so much like ourselves to being more like Jesus. We need to keep this in mind when we are going through difficult times. And we have a choice to make in the face of difficulty - we can resist God’s purpose and pay the serious consequences, or we can join ourselves to God’s purpose and make it our purpose with the result that we won’t simply exist but rather forge our way through the difficulty and come out on the other side a better person.
So the two pieces of steel I’ve shared with you so far are that God’s love for you is everlasting and God’s purpose for you is Christlikeness. The final piece of steel I want to share with you this morning is found in 2 Cor. 12, verses 7 - 10, and here we are going to see that God’s grace for me is sufficient.
III. God’s Grace For Me is Sufficient
The context of these verses is important. Apparently, the Apostle Paul had some kind of physical ailment that he felt was slowing him down in his service for the Lord. From various indicators in his other letters, this ailment had disfigured him in some way and probably had something to do with his eyes. But whatever it was, he felt like he could serve God better if he were healed of this problem. With that background, let’s start reading half way through verse seven, " . . . for this reason, to keep me from exalting myself, there was given me a thorn in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to buffet me-- to keep me from exalting myself! 8 Concerning this I entreated the Lord three times that it might depart from me. 9 And He has said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness." Most gladly, therefore, I will rather boast about my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may dwell in me. 10 Therefore I am well content with weaknesses, with insults, with distresses, with persecutions, with difficulties, for Christ's sake; for when I am weak, then I am strong.”
Did you see God’s answer to Paul. He said, “Paul, I’m not going to deliver you from your distress.” That doesn’t sound very kind, does it? Would God really say to us, “I’m not going to heal you. I’m not going to give you a better job with a higher income. I’m not going to give you a sweet, loving, understanding, considerate spouse.”? The answer is “yes.” But he continues with, “I will give you the strength (“grace”) to bear it.” We see the same basic idea in Hebrews 4:15 - 16. In speaking about Jesus we read, “For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tested in all things as we are, yet without sin. 16 Let us therefore draw near with confidence to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and may find grace to help in time of need.
There are two important points to remember here. First of all, Jesus understands what you are going through (v. 15). Secondly, because of His ability to understand our sufferings, we can go to Him with confidence and He will give us the grace we need to bear up under our difficulty.
Look with me at 1 Cor. 10:13. “No temptation [“test” or “trial” is probably a better translation] has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted [tested, or tried] beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, that you may be able to endure it. By virtue of the fact that you are in the situation you are (whether it is chronic pain, or deep depression, or spiteful children, or some addiction, of financial pressure), you know you can handle it with God’s help. God will give you the grace you need to endure the hardship. I don’t know about you, but I find this verse to be one of the most comforting verses in the Bible, because it assures me that there are some things I’ll never have to face. God knows what I can and cannot handle, and the promise of 1 Cor. 10:13 is that God will not ever give me difficulty beyond my capacity to handle with His help.
So what are the three pieces of steel? 1) God’s love for me is everlasting. 2) God’s purpose for me is Christ-likeness, and 3) God’s grace for me is sufficient. Do you see how these truths can act as steel in your life? This is the kind of stuff that allows you to sway without collapsing when you are hit hard. These truths enable you to endure pressure without imploding. It is my prayer that if you are struggling for any reason this morning that you will find the truth of God’s Word to sustain you and comfort you and enable you to be faithful.
Note: I'd like to thank Dr. James Berg, faculty member of Bob Jones Seminary, for the headings I used in this message. He actually deals with four principles in his lecture on Four Stabilizing Truths, adding the point that God's Word is the final, right answer.
2 Cor. 4:6-10
I’d like you to turn to 2 Cor. 4 this morning, and I want to speak to you about structural steel. Structural steel is what large buildings and skyscrapers are constructed of. It is the skeleton that holds the entire structure together and erect. For thousands of years mankind was limited in the size and height of what he could build, but with the advent of steel, everything changed. Steel is easily and quickly manufactured whereas wood takes years to be replenished. Steel is stronger than wood, it doesn’t burn, and it’s more flexible and easier to use than stone. So when the steel smelting process was perfected by Bessemer in the late 1800’s, its easy to see why steel became such a huge industry and why architecture was changed forever.
What does structural steel have to do with you and me? Well, in the same way that steel gives strength and stability to buildings, we need something to give us strength and stability in our lives. Steel is what allows a skyscraper to flex and sway during a hurricane (sometimes as much as 3 – 5 feet) without collapsing. Steel is what keeps a submarine from imploding when it is under 1.25 metric tons of pressure per square centimeter on a deep dive.
I don’t know about you, but those ideas appeal to me, because you don’t have to be alive for very many years before you figure out that life can be hard. This is why we sing the song, “It’s not an easy road I am called on to travel, for many are the troubles we bear.” We struggle with our spouse, we struggle with our children, we are under pressure from our bosses, we deal with debilitating physical problems, we have too much month left at the end of the paycheck, we suffer from the decline of our culture and nation, we are faced with tragedy in the lives of those around us, and the list could go on and on. I heard recently about a young mother who swerved to avoid hitting a dear and had a terrible wreck. She will probably be in a coma for months, if not years, and then face extensive rehabilitation, if she ever revives. How is her husband and five children supposed to cope with that?
As Job puts it, “ . . . evil does not spring from the soil, and trouble does not sprout from the earth. People are born for trouble as readily as sparks fly up from a fire.” His point is that difficulty and trouble and suffering and hardship and pressure is inextricably entwined with the human experience. No one is exempt. So as followers of Christ, how are we supposed to handle the pressures and stresses of life that we don’t have any control over?
This is where structural steel comes into play, and the Apostle Paul refers to it in 2 Cor. 4:6-10.
6 For God, who said, "Let there be light in the darkness," has made this light shine in our hearts so we could know the glory of God that is seen in the face of Jesus Christ. 7 We now have this light shining in our hearts, but we ourselves are like fragile clay jars containing this great treasure. This makes it clear that our great power is from God, not from ourselves. 8 We are pressed on every side by troubles, but we are not crushed. We are perplexed, but not driven to despair. 9 We are hunted down, but never abandoned by God. We get knocked down, but we are not destroyed. 10 Through suffering, our bodies continue to share in the death of Jesus so that the life of Jesus may also be seen in our bodies.
Even though Paul doesn’t use the phrase “structural steel” in these verses, he makes reference in verses six and seven to something on the inside that keeps us from collapsing or imploding when life hits us hard. So even though I can’t explain to you the “why” of difficulty, I can give you three truths that will add some steel to your life. The first piece of structural steel I want you to see is found in Jer. 31:3, and it is the truth that God’s love for me is everlasting.
I. God’s Love For Me is Everlasting - Jer. 31:3
When life hits us hard, we are often tempted to wonder whether or not God really does love us. Maybe you don’t personally struggle at this level, but I assure you that many, many other people do. The Bible teaches unequivocally that “God is love,” and it is impossible for many people to reconcile a loving God with suffering and difficulty. If God really is a loving God, why does He let little girls be sexually abused by their uncle? The reason we think this way is because from a purely human perspective, love is most often demonstrated by acts of kindness and generosity and self-sacrifice. From a human perspective, acts of malice or evil or ill will are indicative of a lack of love. Because of this kind of thinking, when something tragic happens to us, our first inclination many times is to interpret that event through a purely human lens. And if we make that mistake, we will draw some very dangerous conclusions about God.
So the first piece of steel I want to share with you today is found in Jer. 31:3, which says, "The LORD appeared to him from afar, saying, "I have loved you with an everlasting love; Therefore I have drawn you with loving kindness." The point Jeremiah is making in this verse is that as he reflects on the history of Israel, he can see that God has a history of loving actions toward His people. It was an “everlasting love.” They were chosen out of all the nations of the earth to be God's special people. They were delivered from Egypt. They were sustained in the wilderness. They were miraculously installed in the Promised Land, they were providentially protected in their early years as a nation. So as far as Jeremiah could recall, God had a history of loving actions toward the nation of Israel.
And what is of great importance to us is that at the time Jeremiah wrote this, the nation of Israel was going through some very distressing times. These were not the glory days of Israel's history. Israel was not some wealthy, strong, unified, world power. They were weak and harassed and the rulers were corrupt and the economy was bad. Injustice was prevalent. And in that context, God comes to Jeremiah and says, "I have loved you with an everlasting love." God’s message to Jeremiah in this passage is that the presence of suffering / difficulty /the existence of injustice / hardship does not indicate a lack of God's love.
This is the kind of perspective we need to have, and when you think about it, it is a mature perspective, isn’t it? Think with me for a moment about a 6 year old who doesn’t want to go to school on a beautiful fall day. It is warm and sunny outside, he has been building a fort in the woods, and he has a new puppy he wants to spend the day with; and from his six year old perspective there is nothing worse, nothing more unfair, than being forced to sit still in a hot school room, with Mrs. McGregor, and memorize multiplication tables. In fact, in his six year old mind, he is going to perceive his father’s adamancy that he go to school as being unloving. And he may even tell his father, “When I’m a Daddy, I’m not going to make my children go to school.” This is typical of six year olds – they perceive enforced hardship as being unloving. Of course from our mature perspective as adults, we know that the unloving thing to do is to give in to the child’s desires.
We need to learn how to apply this perspective to God and His actions toward us. We need to grow up in our understanding of what love looks like. As Paul says in 1 Cor. 13:11, “When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, and I reasoned like a child. When I became a man [when I matured, when I grew up], I put childish ways behind me.” A mature perspective of love understands that trial and difficulty is not indicative of a lack of love.
If we think about it, regardless of our current difficult circumstances, we can recall the same kind of actions on God's part toward us, that Jeremiah could recall. God chose us for salvation. He delivered us from the power and penalty of sin. He has providentially protected and provided for us. In fact, as far back as we can see God had demonstrated his love for us. And we need to be careful to remember that the presence of tribulation in our lives does not indicate a lack of God's love (see also Rom. 8:31-39).
So our first piece of steel is that God’s love for me is everlasting. Look with me now at Romans 8 where we are going to see our second piece of steel. In verses 28 and 29 we see that God has an objective for my life, and that is that I become more and more like His Son, Jesus.
II. God’s Purpose For Me is Christlikeness
In verses 28 and 29 we read, “And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. [Please don’t ever stop right here! The “good” of verse 28 is found in verse 29] For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son that He might be the first-born among many brethren; 30 and whom He predestined, these He also called; and whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.”
God has an objective for your life, and that objective is that you become more and more like His Son, Jesus. God is not content with you the way you are right now! Let that sink in. Let me make this real personal. God is not content with Murray in his present condition. He wants Murray to become more and more like His Son, Jesus. I don’t care how long you have been saved, I don’t care how mature you think you are, you have areas in your life where you need to grow to be more like Christ.
Because of this truth, because of God’s objective for us, God is constantly working in our lives to “conform us to the image of His Son,” to use Paul’s language. God wants Billy to look less like Billy and more like Jesus. God wants Loretta to look less like Loretta and more like Jesus. He has a variety of tools He can use to accomplish this – parents, spouse, pastor, obnoxious co-worker, children, in-laws, boss, the economy, your neighbor, the list is practically endless – one of them being difficulty. God often uses difficulty to conform us to the image of His Son.
Think with me about the significance of the words “all things work together for good.” “All things” is somewhat comprehensive, isn’t it? Does it include things like rape and unwanted pregnancy? Is that one of those “all things” that “work together for good?” I heard about a godly 18 year old young lady who was raped and impregnated. And now she is bearing in her body a constant reminder of the horror of that incident. And when this child is born, and she is not putting it up for adoption, she will daily be reminded of the trauma every time she looks at her baby. Does Rom. 8:28-29 apply to situations like this? Absolutely! Here is a truth worth writing down. “God will take you where you do not want to go, in order to produce in you what you could not achieve on your own.” Paul Tripp.
So what does this have to do with having reinforcing steel in our lives when going through difficult times. Here is the connection. Purpose in life is what makes the difference between living and simply existing. Having a sense of purpose takes us from simply weathering the storm to actually battling our way through it and coming out on the other side. Having a clear cut sense of purpose is what gives sense and rationality to the difficulty. And we need to remember that God has a purpose in mind for us when difficult times come – He is using this difficulty to make me more like His Son Jesus. This truth is another piece of steel in your life. There is purpose behind the difficulty – it is not random. There is purpose behind the diagnosis of fibromyalgia. There is purpose behind the child drowning. There is purpose behind the hunting accident that takes a young man’s life. All things work together for good because they conform us to the image of Christ.
I read a very interesting illustration of how this works in a prisoner’s account of life in a Nazi death camp. Every day the Jews of this particular camp were forced to do backbreaking, disgusting labor by combining a large city’s raw sewage and garbage. They would distill this to make a fuel additive. And even worse than the nauseating smell was the realization that they were fueling the Nazi war machine. And the man who was telling about this said that even though it was inhumane beyond our ability to comprehend, the men of the prison camp did their work every day. One night the Allies bombed the plant where this fuel was made, so the next morning the camp commandant had them spend the day simply loading carts with sand, carting it to the other side of the compound, and unloading it. And that was it for the day. The next morning, he had the men move the sand back to its original place, and that was it for the day. The next morning, he had them move it back to the other side of the compound - and they were through for the day.
After several days of this purposeless work, men in the compound started breaking down mentally. Dozens actually committing suicide. Some would attempt to escape from the prison in broad daylight, only to be gunned down by the guards. Some men would throw themselves into the electrified fences only to be electrocuted in a terrible sizzling flash. And the man who was giving this account said the reason these men started committing suicide was because the camp commandant took away their sense of purpose. He said that as vile as the work was in the sewage plant, and as repulsive as it was to the men to actually be helping the enemy, at least there was a rationale and a purpose behind what they were doing, and they were able to live. They didn’t have that when they were moving sand. And when the sensibility of their labor and their purposefulness was removed, they lost their will to live.
As unpleasant as difficulty is, there is purpose behind it. There are some things you will never learn when life is good and everything is going the way you want it to. As Charles Stanley says, “In the valley, we discover the character of God in a way we never would on the mountain peak.” Those of you who have been through the valley know what he is talking about. Peter talks about this truth in 1 Peter 4:13 when he talks about “sharing in the sufferings of Christ” and how suffering creates a closeness with Jesus and an identification with Jesus that non-sufferers don’t have.
Difficulty has the potential to conform us to the image of Christ, or to change us from being so much like ourselves to being more like Jesus. We need to keep this in mind when we are going through difficult times. And we have a choice to make in the face of difficulty - we can resist God’s purpose and pay the serious consequences, or we can join ourselves to God’s purpose and make it our purpose with the result that we won’t simply exist but rather forge our way through the difficulty and come out on the other side a better person.
So the two pieces of steel I’ve shared with you so far are that God’s love for you is everlasting and God’s purpose for you is Christlikeness. The final piece of steel I want to share with you this morning is found in 2 Cor. 12, verses 7 - 10, and here we are going to see that God’s grace for me is sufficient.
III. God’s Grace For Me is Sufficient
The context of these verses is important. Apparently, the Apostle Paul had some kind of physical ailment that he felt was slowing him down in his service for the Lord. From various indicators in his other letters, this ailment had disfigured him in some way and probably had something to do with his eyes. But whatever it was, he felt like he could serve God better if he were healed of this problem. With that background, let’s start reading half way through verse seven, " . . . for this reason, to keep me from exalting myself, there was given me a thorn in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to buffet me-- to keep me from exalting myself! 8 Concerning this I entreated the Lord three times that it might depart from me. 9 And He has said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness." Most gladly, therefore, I will rather boast about my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may dwell in me. 10 Therefore I am well content with weaknesses, with insults, with distresses, with persecutions, with difficulties, for Christ's sake; for when I am weak, then I am strong.”
Did you see God’s answer to Paul. He said, “Paul, I’m not going to deliver you from your distress.” That doesn’t sound very kind, does it? Would God really say to us, “I’m not going to heal you. I’m not going to give you a better job with a higher income. I’m not going to give you a sweet, loving, understanding, considerate spouse.”? The answer is “yes.” But he continues with, “I will give you the strength (“grace”) to bear it.” We see the same basic idea in Hebrews 4:15 - 16. In speaking about Jesus we read, “For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tested in all things as we are, yet without sin. 16 Let us therefore draw near with confidence to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and may find grace to help in time of need.
There are two important points to remember here. First of all, Jesus understands what you are going through (v. 15). Secondly, because of His ability to understand our sufferings, we can go to Him with confidence and He will give us the grace we need to bear up under our difficulty.
Look with me at 1 Cor. 10:13. “No temptation [“test” or “trial” is probably a better translation] has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted [tested, or tried] beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, that you may be able to endure it. By virtue of the fact that you are in the situation you are (whether it is chronic pain, or deep depression, or spiteful children, or some addiction, of financial pressure), you know you can handle it with God’s help. God will give you the grace you need to endure the hardship. I don’t know about you, but I find this verse to be one of the most comforting verses in the Bible, because it assures me that there are some things I’ll never have to face. God knows what I can and cannot handle, and the promise of 1 Cor. 10:13 is that God will not ever give me difficulty beyond my capacity to handle with His help.
So what are the three pieces of steel? 1) God’s love for me is everlasting. 2) God’s purpose for me is Christ-likeness, and 3) God’s grace for me is sufficient. Do you see how these truths can act as steel in your life? This is the kind of stuff that allows you to sway without collapsing when you are hit hard. These truths enable you to endure pressure without imploding. It is my prayer that if you are struggling for any reason this morning that you will find the truth of God’s Word to sustain you and comfort you and enable you to be faithful.
Note: I'd like to thank Dr. James Berg, faculty member of Bob Jones Seminary, for the headings I used in this message. He actually deals with four principles in his lecture on Four Stabilizing Truths, adding the point that God's Word is the final, right answer.
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
The Danger of Bounty
The Danger of Bounty
Deut. 8:1-11
I think we are all familiar with the stories of children born into vast wealth, and more often than not, these are sad stories – just do some research on Christiana Onassis and you’ll see what I mean. As the sole inheritor of the Aristotle Onassis shipping fortune, she died when she was 38 years old after years of excessive living and drug abuse.
Another particularly sad story is the story of Huntington Hartford. The fortune he inherited was from the A & P Grocery Store chain. At one time, A & P was the Wal Mart of the world – it was the world’s largest grocer and second only to General Motors in sales of goods. Since it was money he inherited and not money he had worked hard for, he blew through multiple millions of dollars and died as an alcoholic drug addict living in squalor in Greenwich Village. You can read his life story in the book Squandered Fortune, written by Lisa Gubernick.
We could go on and on with examples like this, but the biblical principle these stories illustrate concerns the danger of bounty. When you have a lot of something, there are some very specific dangers you have to be on the lookout for that you don’t have to be concerned about in other circumstances. For instance, if you are snorkeling in the ocean, do you have to be on the lookout for deer ticks? No. When you come out and dry off, you don’t examine yourself minutely to make sure there aren’t any crawling around on you. Why not? Because Lyme Disease is not a danger associated with snorkeling. It is a danger associated with hunting and hiking, but not snorkeling. In the same way, there are some dangers specifically associated with bounty.
We see this in Deut. 8. As I think about the nation of Israel and how God blessed them when they went into the land He had promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob – I see some parallels with how God has blessed us today. Last Sunday we heard many testimonies about how much God has blessed us with. We live in a land of bounty, and there is a warning in this passage that is very pertinent to us today.
"All the commandments that I am commanding you today you shall be careful to do, that you may live and multiply, and go in and possess the land which the LORD swore to give to your forefathers. 2 "And you shall remember all the way which the LORD your God has led you in the wilderness these forty years, that He might humble you, testing you, to know what was in your heart, whether you would keep His commandments or not. 3 "And He humbled you and let you be hungry, and fed you with manna which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that He might make you understand that man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by everything that proceeds out of the mouth of the LORD. 4 "Your clothing did not wear out on you, nor did your foot swell these forty years. 5 "Thus you are to know in your heart that the LORD your God was disciplining you just as a man disciplines his son. 6 "Therefore, you shall keep the commandments of the LORD your God, to walk in His ways and to fear Him.
7 "For the LORD your God is bringing you into a good land, a land of brooks of water, of fountains and springs, flowing forth in valleys and hills; 8 a land of wheat and barley, of vines and fig trees and pomegranates, a land of olive oil and honey; 9 a land where you shall eat food without scarcity, in which you shall not lack anything; a land whose stones are iron, and out of whose hills you can dig copper. 10 "When you have eaten and are satisfied, you shall bless the LORD your God for the good land which He has given you (this was last Sunday’s service). 11 (Here is this Sunday’s message) "Beware lest you forget the LORD your God.
Bounty, as wonderful as it is and as much as we enjoy it, is very fertile ground for breeding all kinds of unbiblical attitudes. There are multiple passages in the Bible we could appeal to to show this truth, but think about Jesus’ teaching that it is easier for a camel to get through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven. Why would He say that? Because bounty (in this instance, a bounty of money) has a tendency to breed all kinds of bad behavior, and this morning I want to share four of them with you.
First of all, bounty can foster a sense of autonomy – Mt. 6:11 “give us this day our daily bread.” Jesus’ point in this statement is that we need God’s direct involvement in our lives for our physical sustenance on a daily basis. When we have a lot – whether it is health, or food, or clothing, or money, or friends, or work, or property - we tend to forget our total dependence on God. We start to become autonomous – we get these feelings of independence.
We know we need Him in a general sense, in the large scheme of things, but not on a daily basis. I had a man in my church one time who never came to prayer meeting – until he was diagnosed with cancer. He had a hectic work schedule as a state inspector and on Wednesday nights at 7:00 he always had something more important to do – until he was diagnosed with cancer. Suddenly he discovered that he did have time for prayer meeting and that corporate prayer by the body of Christ was important. What was going on in his life? Bounty fosters a sense of autonomy. And when God took away his bountiful health he woke up to his need of God’s daily sustenance. I can’t tell you how many men I’ve know who have suddenly gotten serious about the Lord after their wives have walked out on them. What was going on? When they had a bountiful marriage they didn’t need God quite as desperately as they did when the marriage started to unravel.
So the first danger we need to be on the lookout for is that bounty fosters a sense of autonomy. The second danger we need to be aware of is that bounty can foster a sense of ingratitude.
Bounty can foster a sense of ingratitude – In Phil. 4:11 - 13, Paul alerts us to a very important lesson when he says, “I have learned how to be content in whatever circumstances I am. I know how to get along with humble means, and I also know how to live in prosperity; in any and every circumstance I have learned the secret of being filled and going hungry, both of having abundance and suffering need. I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.”
When we have a lot we tend to think that our bounty is normal, and we get unhappy with less. Why do so many newly married couples get so deeply into debt? Because they think that the standard of living their parents have achieved is the norm. And because they think it is the norm, they get dissatisfied with what they have. But instead of saving to acquire what they want, they go into debt to get it. What is happening is that the bounty they grew up in makes them ungrateful for the little bit they do have.
I can remember being at a church dinner and watching a child fuss with his mother because he didn’t want to eat his applesauce. He wanted to throw his plate out and go get a new bowl of applesauce because some gravy had gotten into the applesauce on his plate. What was going on here? Bounty can foster a sense of ingratitude.
Several years ago our family was going through a very difficult time financially, and we were literally down to our last few dollars. Because of this we were taking some pretty drastic steps to cut our living expenses and were by no means living the American Dream. During this time my brother and his family came to visit us, and they wanted to go to the city and do some sightseeing. That evening, they took us out to dinner at the Olive Garden, and I can’t even begin to tell you what a treat that was for us after a year of marginal living. Also at the restaurant that evening was a group of young people all dressed up and enjoying themselves because they were
going to a show on Broadway. When I was done with my meal, I went to the restroom and had to walk through their area of the restraint. The wait staff was clearing their tables and as I walked past the large plastic tubs of dirty dishes, I saw multiple plates of untouched meals and many plates with only a few bites taken out of them. It just about sent me through the roof. Why was there so much waste? Because of the bounty these children had been living with. Bounty fosters a sense of ingratitude. Why did I have such a negative response? Because of the lack of bounty I had been living with. If those children had lived through a war or the Great Depression, their plates probably would have been licked clean.
When someone leaves the church because the pastor preaches too long, or they get overlooked after doing something special for the church, or they have a conflict with a Sunday School teacher, or because a Deacon reprimands their child, what is going on? The bounty of churches in a single county has bred a spirit of ingratitude in the body of Christ.
If you don’t like this church, go to Pastor Quick’s church in South Cairo, Will Balta’s in South Westerlo, Pastor Green’s in Westerlo, Greenville Christian Church, First Baptist in Catskill.
If you were a member of an underground house church in North Korea, and the Sunday School teacher was dry, and uninspiring, and always seemed to focus on the same few topics, how quickly do you think you would leave that church and find another one? You probably wouldn’t! North Korea doesn’t have bountiful churches, and the parishioners are grateful for what they have. Bounty had a tendency to foster a sense of ingratitude.
So the second danger of bounty we need to be aware of is that of ingratitude. The third danger I want to share with you is that of focusing on the temporal. Not only can bounty cause us to be autonomous and ungrateful, it can cause us to lose our focus on the eternal and become preoccupied with the temporal.
Bounty can foster a sense of the temporal – In Luke 12, Jesus tells a story about a rich farmer who had a very productive year, so he tore down his existing barns and built bigger ones to hold all his produce. He calculated that he had enough produce for many years to come, so he sat back to take it easy for a while, and in verse 20 Jesus said, “You fool, this night your soul is required of you, and who will own what you have prepared?” When we have a lot, we tend to forget about eternity. Our stuff tends to become the focus of our lives.
When we are living in bounty, it is imperative that we remember what John teaches us in 1 John 2:17. “The world is passing away as well as its strong attractions, but the one who does the will of God will abide forever.” John is referring to what Peter elaborates on in 2 Peter 3:10-12. “But the day of the Lord will come as unexpectedly as a thief. Then the heavens will pass away with a terrible noise, and the very elements themselves will disappear in fire, and the earth and everything on it will be found to deserve judgment. 11 Since everything around us is going to be destroyed like this, what holy and godly lives you should live, 12 looking forward to the day of God and hurrying it along. On that day, he will set the heavens on fire, and the elements will melt away in the flames.”
Here is a very good exercise to do every once in a while. I want you to envision your most treasured physical asset – maybe it is your car, your house, your savings account, your photo albums – your most treasured physical asset. Not your spouse, or your family, or something like that. Do you have that in your mind? Now, picture that thing as a pile of ashes. That is the reality of our situation! That Honda Odyssey, with heated leather seats and a GPS is one day going to be a lump of molten metal. All those silver coins that you have been accumulating and stashing away to carry you when the economy crashes is one day going to be a pool of liquid silver.
This is why Jesus tells us not to lay up treasures here on earth. In Mt. 6:19-21 He says, “Don't store up treasures here on earth, where moths eat them and rust destroys them, and where thieves break in and steal. 20 Store your treasures in heaven, where moths and rust cannot destroy, and thieves do not break in and steal. 21 Wherever your treasure is, there the desires of your heart will also be.” Bounty has a tendency to foster a preoccupation with the temporal,
So as we are considering the dangers associated with bounty, we have looked at autonomy, ingratitude, and a preoccupation with the temporal. The final danger we need to be aware of is that bounty can foster a sense of spiritual myopia. Myopia is the term given to defective vision. It’s when you can’t see an object clearly, and bounty has a tendency to cause myopia, not in the physical sense but in the spiritual sense.
Bounty can foster a sense of myopia – In Rev. 3:17 we read about a group of believers in a church in Laodicea, and God’s assessment of them is this. “'Because you say, "I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have need of nothing (do you see their bounty?)," and you do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked.” Do you see the connection there? What kind of people are blind to their real condition? The rich, the wealthy, and the self-sufficient. When we have a lot we tend to be blinded to the reality of our condition.
We have talked before about the truth that all is not well in the church in America! Last summer I spoke to you about the matter of discipleship and I gave you the startling statistics about the condition of Evangelicalism, and it isn’t a pretty picture. Yet if you were to interview the average Evangelical this morning after he has attended his church, he would tell you that everything is going great. Why? Because of this truth – bounty fosters a sense of myopia.
I want to close this morning with a question. Why is it that the only place where the church is exploding with new converts is in countries where Christianity is illegal? Because of these truths about bounty. Bounty is very fertile soil for all kinds of bad behavior: autonomy, ingratitude, a preoccupation with the temporal, and spiritual myopia. Is there a solution? God has blessed us tremendously, how do we deal with our bounty?
1. Acknowledge its source – 1 Cor. 4:7 – What do you have that you did not receive?
2. Spread it around – 2 Cor. 9:7 – God loves generosity!
3. Strive for balance – Prov. 30:7-9 – Excess in either direction has its dangers.
4. Hold on to what you have very loosely – Job 1:21
As we come to the Lord’s table, I want us to appreciate the example of Jesus who left the bounty of heaven for our sake. He gave up the riches of heaven and became poor for us. Aren’t you glad that His bounty didn’t have the negative impact on him that it usually has on us?
Deut. 8:1-11
I think we are all familiar with the stories of children born into vast wealth, and more often than not, these are sad stories – just do some research on Christiana Onassis and you’ll see what I mean. As the sole inheritor of the Aristotle Onassis shipping fortune, she died when she was 38 years old after years of excessive living and drug abuse.
Another particularly sad story is the story of Huntington Hartford. The fortune he inherited was from the A & P Grocery Store chain. At one time, A & P was the Wal Mart of the world – it was the world’s largest grocer and second only to General Motors in sales of goods. Since it was money he inherited and not money he had worked hard for, he blew through multiple millions of dollars and died as an alcoholic drug addict living in squalor in Greenwich Village. You can read his life story in the book Squandered Fortune, written by Lisa Gubernick.
We could go on and on with examples like this, but the biblical principle these stories illustrate concerns the danger of bounty. When you have a lot of something, there are some very specific dangers you have to be on the lookout for that you don’t have to be concerned about in other circumstances. For instance, if you are snorkeling in the ocean, do you have to be on the lookout for deer ticks? No. When you come out and dry off, you don’t examine yourself minutely to make sure there aren’t any crawling around on you. Why not? Because Lyme Disease is not a danger associated with snorkeling. It is a danger associated with hunting and hiking, but not snorkeling. In the same way, there are some dangers specifically associated with bounty.
We see this in Deut. 8. As I think about the nation of Israel and how God blessed them when they went into the land He had promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob – I see some parallels with how God has blessed us today. Last Sunday we heard many testimonies about how much God has blessed us with. We live in a land of bounty, and there is a warning in this passage that is very pertinent to us today.
"All the commandments that I am commanding you today you shall be careful to do, that you may live and multiply, and go in and possess the land which the LORD swore to give to your forefathers. 2 "And you shall remember all the way which the LORD your God has led you in the wilderness these forty years, that He might humble you, testing you, to know what was in your heart, whether you would keep His commandments or not. 3 "And He humbled you and let you be hungry, and fed you with manna which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that He might make you understand that man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by everything that proceeds out of the mouth of the LORD. 4 "Your clothing did not wear out on you, nor did your foot swell these forty years. 5 "Thus you are to know in your heart that the LORD your God was disciplining you just as a man disciplines his son. 6 "Therefore, you shall keep the commandments of the LORD your God, to walk in His ways and to fear Him.
7 "For the LORD your God is bringing you into a good land, a land of brooks of water, of fountains and springs, flowing forth in valleys and hills; 8 a land of wheat and barley, of vines and fig trees and pomegranates, a land of olive oil and honey; 9 a land where you shall eat food without scarcity, in which you shall not lack anything; a land whose stones are iron, and out of whose hills you can dig copper. 10 "When you have eaten and are satisfied, you shall bless the LORD your God for the good land which He has given you (this was last Sunday’s service). 11 (Here is this Sunday’s message) "Beware lest you forget the LORD your God.
Bounty, as wonderful as it is and as much as we enjoy it, is very fertile ground for breeding all kinds of unbiblical attitudes. There are multiple passages in the Bible we could appeal to to show this truth, but think about Jesus’ teaching that it is easier for a camel to get through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven. Why would He say that? Because bounty (in this instance, a bounty of money) has a tendency to breed all kinds of bad behavior, and this morning I want to share four of them with you.
First of all, bounty can foster a sense of autonomy – Mt. 6:11 “give us this day our daily bread.” Jesus’ point in this statement is that we need God’s direct involvement in our lives for our physical sustenance on a daily basis. When we have a lot – whether it is health, or food, or clothing, or money, or friends, or work, or property - we tend to forget our total dependence on God. We start to become autonomous – we get these feelings of independence.
We know we need Him in a general sense, in the large scheme of things, but not on a daily basis. I had a man in my church one time who never came to prayer meeting – until he was diagnosed with cancer. He had a hectic work schedule as a state inspector and on Wednesday nights at 7:00 he always had something more important to do – until he was diagnosed with cancer. Suddenly he discovered that he did have time for prayer meeting and that corporate prayer by the body of Christ was important. What was going on in his life? Bounty fosters a sense of autonomy. And when God took away his bountiful health he woke up to his need of God’s daily sustenance. I can’t tell you how many men I’ve know who have suddenly gotten serious about the Lord after their wives have walked out on them. What was going on? When they had a bountiful marriage they didn’t need God quite as desperately as they did when the marriage started to unravel.
So the first danger we need to be on the lookout for is that bounty fosters a sense of autonomy. The second danger we need to be aware of is that bounty can foster a sense of ingratitude.
Bounty can foster a sense of ingratitude – In Phil. 4:11 - 13, Paul alerts us to a very important lesson when he says, “I have learned how to be content in whatever circumstances I am. I know how to get along with humble means, and I also know how to live in prosperity; in any and every circumstance I have learned the secret of being filled and going hungry, both of having abundance and suffering need. I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.”
When we have a lot we tend to think that our bounty is normal, and we get unhappy with less. Why do so many newly married couples get so deeply into debt? Because they think that the standard of living their parents have achieved is the norm. And because they think it is the norm, they get dissatisfied with what they have. But instead of saving to acquire what they want, they go into debt to get it. What is happening is that the bounty they grew up in makes them ungrateful for the little bit they do have.
I can remember being at a church dinner and watching a child fuss with his mother because he didn’t want to eat his applesauce. He wanted to throw his plate out and go get a new bowl of applesauce because some gravy had gotten into the applesauce on his plate. What was going on here? Bounty can foster a sense of ingratitude.
Several years ago our family was going through a very difficult time financially, and we were literally down to our last few dollars. Because of this we were taking some pretty drastic steps to cut our living expenses and were by no means living the American Dream. During this time my brother and his family came to visit us, and they wanted to go to the city and do some sightseeing. That evening, they took us out to dinner at the Olive Garden, and I can’t even begin to tell you what a treat that was for us after a year of marginal living. Also at the restaurant that evening was a group of young people all dressed up and enjoying themselves because they were
going to a show on Broadway. When I was done with my meal, I went to the restroom and had to walk through their area of the restraint. The wait staff was clearing their tables and as I walked past the large plastic tubs of dirty dishes, I saw multiple plates of untouched meals and many plates with only a few bites taken out of them. It just about sent me through the roof. Why was there so much waste? Because of the bounty these children had been living with. Bounty fosters a sense of ingratitude. Why did I have such a negative response? Because of the lack of bounty I had been living with. If those children had lived through a war or the Great Depression, their plates probably would have been licked clean.
When someone leaves the church because the pastor preaches too long, or they get overlooked after doing something special for the church, or they have a conflict with a Sunday School teacher, or because a Deacon reprimands their child, what is going on? The bounty of churches in a single county has bred a spirit of ingratitude in the body of Christ.
If you don’t like this church, go to Pastor Quick’s church in South Cairo, Will Balta’s in South Westerlo, Pastor Green’s in Westerlo, Greenville Christian Church, First Baptist in Catskill.
If you were a member of an underground house church in North Korea, and the Sunday School teacher was dry, and uninspiring, and always seemed to focus on the same few topics, how quickly do you think you would leave that church and find another one? You probably wouldn’t! North Korea doesn’t have bountiful churches, and the parishioners are grateful for what they have. Bounty had a tendency to foster a sense of ingratitude.
So the second danger of bounty we need to be aware of is that of ingratitude. The third danger I want to share with you is that of focusing on the temporal. Not only can bounty cause us to be autonomous and ungrateful, it can cause us to lose our focus on the eternal and become preoccupied with the temporal.
Bounty can foster a sense of the temporal – In Luke 12, Jesus tells a story about a rich farmer who had a very productive year, so he tore down his existing barns and built bigger ones to hold all his produce. He calculated that he had enough produce for many years to come, so he sat back to take it easy for a while, and in verse 20 Jesus said, “You fool, this night your soul is required of you, and who will own what you have prepared?” When we have a lot, we tend to forget about eternity. Our stuff tends to become the focus of our lives.
When we are living in bounty, it is imperative that we remember what John teaches us in 1 John 2:17. “The world is passing away as well as its strong attractions, but the one who does the will of God will abide forever.” John is referring to what Peter elaborates on in 2 Peter 3:10-12. “But the day of the Lord will come as unexpectedly as a thief. Then the heavens will pass away with a terrible noise, and the very elements themselves will disappear in fire, and the earth and everything on it will be found to deserve judgment. 11 Since everything around us is going to be destroyed like this, what holy and godly lives you should live, 12 looking forward to the day of God and hurrying it along. On that day, he will set the heavens on fire, and the elements will melt away in the flames.”
Here is a very good exercise to do every once in a while. I want you to envision your most treasured physical asset – maybe it is your car, your house, your savings account, your photo albums – your most treasured physical asset. Not your spouse, or your family, or something like that. Do you have that in your mind? Now, picture that thing as a pile of ashes. That is the reality of our situation! That Honda Odyssey, with heated leather seats and a GPS is one day going to be a lump of molten metal. All those silver coins that you have been accumulating and stashing away to carry you when the economy crashes is one day going to be a pool of liquid silver.
This is why Jesus tells us not to lay up treasures here on earth. In Mt. 6:19-21 He says, “Don't store up treasures here on earth, where moths eat them and rust destroys them, and where thieves break in and steal. 20 Store your treasures in heaven, where moths and rust cannot destroy, and thieves do not break in and steal. 21 Wherever your treasure is, there the desires of your heart will also be.” Bounty has a tendency to foster a preoccupation with the temporal,
So as we are considering the dangers associated with bounty, we have looked at autonomy, ingratitude, and a preoccupation with the temporal. The final danger we need to be aware of is that bounty can foster a sense of spiritual myopia. Myopia is the term given to defective vision. It’s when you can’t see an object clearly, and bounty has a tendency to cause myopia, not in the physical sense but in the spiritual sense.
Bounty can foster a sense of myopia – In Rev. 3:17 we read about a group of believers in a church in Laodicea, and God’s assessment of them is this. “'Because you say, "I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have need of nothing (do you see their bounty?)," and you do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked.” Do you see the connection there? What kind of people are blind to their real condition? The rich, the wealthy, and the self-sufficient. When we have a lot we tend to be blinded to the reality of our condition.
We have talked before about the truth that all is not well in the church in America! Last summer I spoke to you about the matter of discipleship and I gave you the startling statistics about the condition of Evangelicalism, and it isn’t a pretty picture. Yet if you were to interview the average Evangelical this morning after he has attended his church, he would tell you that everything is going great. Why? Because of this truth – bounty fosters a sense of myopia.
I want to close this morning with a question. Why is it that the only place where the church is exploding with new converts is in countries where Christianity is illegal? Because of these truths about bounty. Bounty is very fertile soil for all kinds of bad behavior: autonomy, ingratitude, a preoccupation with the temporal, and spiritual myopia. Is there a solution? God has blessed us tremendously, how do we deal with our bounty?
1. Acknowledge its source – 1 Cor. 4:7 – What do you have that you did not receive?
2. Spread it around – 2 Cor. 9:7 – God loves generosity!
3. Strive for balance – Prov. 30:7-9 – Excess in either direction has its dangers.
4. Hold on to what you have very loosely – Job 1:21
As we come to the Lord’s table, I want us to appreciate the example of Jesus who left the bounty of heaven for our sake. He gave up the riches of heaven and became poor for us. Aren’t you glad that His bounty didn’t have the negative impact on him that it usually has on us?
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
The Separation of Church and State
I‟d like to start my talk on the separation of church and state with a little survey. When you hear that phrase, how is it usually used? Do you hear it in the context of keeping religious expression out of the public square – or do you hear it in the context of keeping the government from passing legislation that would force religious expression on American citizens?
I can‟t recall hearing this phrase used in any way other than in the context of keeping morality and religious expression out of civic matters. For instance,
You can‟t pray in school today because of “the separation of church and state.”
You can‟t have a statue of the 10 commandments in a courthouse in Alabama because of “the separation of church and state.”
You can‟t have a nativity scene on the courthouse lawn in many communities because of “the separation of church and state.”
You can‟t have a Christmas concert in the school, it has to be a Holiday Concert – because of the separation of church and state.
To say that this phrase is greatly misunderstood is quite an understatement, so in our talk tonight I want to show you where this idea came from, emphasize where it did not come from, what freedom of religion means, what freedom of religion does not mean, and then we‟ll end by looking at early American history to see how our founding fathers felt about it all. Sound like a plan?
Where did this concept of separation of church and state come from? Most people think it is found in the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States. That is incorrect. The way the first amendment reads is, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .” How many of you heard the phrase “separation of church and state” in that sentence?
Here is something we need to understand with great clarity. This phrase, “the separation of church and state” is not found in one single governing document of the United States! It isn‟t found in the Constitution, or the First Amendment, or the Declaration of Independence, or any other official document pertinent to the founding of our Country.
As I said, most Americans believe that it is actually taken from our constitution. Listen to this very sad conversation between the Christian historian David Barton, and a U.S. Congressman who was an accomplished attorney. They were discussing the importance of basic religious values in society, and the Congressman said, “We know these values are important; it‟s unfortunate that we can‟t do anything to promote them.” Barton responded, “Why not?” The Congressman replied, “We just can‟t.” Barton persisted, “Why not?” The Congressman answered, “Because of „separation of church and state.‟” Barton responded, “Separation of church and state? What about it?” He replied, “It‟s in the Constitution – the Constitution won‟t permit us to have religious values in public arenas.” Barton said, “That phrase is not in the Constitution!” Forcefully, the Congressman countered, “Yes it is!” “No it isn‟t!” “Yes it is!” They went back and forth until Barton produced a copy of the Constitution and asked, “Would you please find that phrase for me?” He replied triumphantly, “I‟d be happy to.” He immediately went to the First Amendment, read it – and became very embarrassed. He said, “I can‟t believe this! In law school they always taught us that‟s what the First Amendment said!” Amazed, Barton said, “You‟ve never read the Constitution for yourself?” He replied, “We were never required to read it in law school.” This is a pretty sad commentary on our law schools, and I‟m afraid that this particular Congressman who had never read the Constitution is not an exception to the rule.
So where does this phrase come from? To answer this question, we have to go back to the 1500‟s. On October 31, 1517, the Catholic Church was rocked by what is called today the Protestant Reformation. Three monks – Martin Luther in Germany, Ulrich Zwingli in Switzerland, and John Calvin from France – all broke with the Roman Catholic Church over issues like the authority of the Pope, the use of indulgences, and what they determined to be irreparable corruption.
There was another group of men at the same time, not quite as well known, who believed Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli didn‟t go far enough in their reform efforts. One of the primary issues at stake for these men was the relationship between the church and the state. In the 1500‟s, Catholicism made the state subservient to the church (cf. how the Pope crowned kings, Henry VIII), and Protestantism (Luther, Calvin, et al.) made the church and the state co-equal. This is why the king of the country was also the head of the church. This is why when a baby was baptized, that act made him not only a member of the National church, but also a citizen of the country.
Well, there was a group of men who strongly opposed this idea of the church and the state being so closely aligned. Men like Conrad Grebel, Felix Manz, Balthasar Hubmaier, Jacob Hutter (Hutterites), Jacob Ammann (the Amish), and Menno Simmons (Mennonites). These men and those who followed their teachings were know as Anabaptists.
The Anabaptists understood with great clarity that even though God and State were closely connected and even intertwined to a great degree, there was a very clear boundary that the state could not step over. Cf. story of Jesus and the poll tax. These Anabaptist paid very dearly for their insistence on this matter because their actions and beliefs were considered treason. Yet it this insistence on the clear boundary between the church and state that has marked Baptist thought for the last 500 years, which is why on Oct. 7, 1801, The Danbury Baptist Association of Danbury, CT, sent a letter to President Thomas Jefferson expressing their concern about this matter.
The essence of their concern was this. These Baptist pastors felt that freedom of religion was an inalienable right, it had been given to them by God, not granted to them by the state. And there is a big difference between those two concepts. They were concerned that since freedom of religion was mentioned in the First Amendment of the Constitution (“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .”), that people would erroneously conclude that it was a freedom granted by the Government, and not by God. And if the Government can give us something, it can also take it away. They wanted Jefferson to clarify that freedom of religion was not something that the state could grant or suspend – it was an inalienable right.
Jefferson replied to this letter on Jan. 1, 1802 and said, “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, . . . I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should „make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,‟ thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.”
Three things to remember about this: First - this phrase, “a wall of separation between Church and State” is a phrase taken from Thomas Jefferson‟s personal correspondence to a group of Baptist pastors, not some kind of official statement. Secondly, Jefferson was simply reaffirming that the U.S. Government has no right to establish a religion for the entire nation (like the church of England of that day, or the church of Scotland of that day, etc.), or to involve itself in religious disputes, as did the European states. The “wall of separation” was for the purpose of keeping the state out of religious matters (the presence of Christ in communion). To quote him, “religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God.” The third thing to take from Jefferson‟s statement is that he was not saying, nor does the First Amendment advocate that religious matters or expressions have no place in the public square or in government. Yes, he mentions a wall between the two institutions, but that wall only stops influence in one direction! From state to church, not from church to state.
How do we know this? Because of our history and architecture. Listen to these quotes and facts that demonstrate how closely intertwined religious expression and public life was in the early days of our country. If you have ever wondered how our founding fathers felt about religious expression, here it is.
John Adams, in a letter to Thomas Jefferson on June 28, 1813 said, “The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were . . . the general principles of Christianity.” Works, Vol. X p. 45
On Oct. 11, 1789, John Adams in a speech to a group of officers in the Massachusetts Militia said, “We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion . . . Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. Works, Vol. IX p. 229
Robert Winthrop, a Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives in the 1840‟s said, “Men, in a word, must necessarily be controlled either by a power within them or by a power without them, either by the Word of God or by the strong arm of man, either by the Bible or by the bayonet.”
In George Washington‟s Farewell Address, he said, “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness – these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them.”
On the very first day after George Washington became the commander in chief of the American forces in the Revolutionary war, he issued this order: “The General most earnestly requires and expects a due observance of those articles of war established for the government of the army, which forbid profane cursing, swearing, and drunkenness. And in like manner he requires and expects of all officers and soldiers, not engaged in actual duty, a punctual attendance on Divine service, to implore the blessing of Heaven upon the means used for our safety and defense.”
Thomas Jefferson - “In our village of Charlottesville, there is a good degree of religion, with a small spice only of fanaticism. We have four sects, but without either church or meeting-house. The court-house is the common temple, one Sunday in the month to each. Here, Episcopalian and Presbyterian, Methodist and Baptist, meet together, joining in hymning their Maker, listen with attention and devotion to each others‟ preachers, and all mix in society with perfect harmony.”
As you walk up the steps to the building which houses the U..S Supreme Court you can see near the top of the building a row of the world's law givers and each one is facing one in the middle who is facing forward with a full frontal view ... It is Moses and he is holding the Ten Commandments! As you enter the Supreme Court courtroom, the two huge oak doors have the Ten Commandments engraved on each lower portion of each door. As you sit inside the courtroom, you can see the wall, right above where the Supreme Court Judges sit, a display of the Ten Commandments! There are Bible verses etched in stone all over the Federal Buildings and Monuments in Washington , D.C.
James Madison, the fourth president, known as 'The Father of Our Constitution' made the following statement: “We have staked the whole of all our political Institutions upon the capacity of mankind for Self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to The Ten Commandments of God.”
So what has happened over the last 100 years is that there has been an evolution of thought in our country. It has been fueled by an activist Supreme Court, and public opinion has swung from “government not being able to establish a national religion,” to “government not permitting religious expression in the civic arena.” As Dave Barton says, “The result is that the First Amendment is now used to prohibit the very religious activities that the Founders themselves once encouraged under the same Amendment.”
Alexis de Tocqueville was a French jurist who visited the US in 1831, and he was so impressed with what he saw that he went home and wrote one of the best studies of American culture and Constitutional system that had been published up to that point. His book was called Democracy in America, and listen to his first impression of our country in the early 1800‟s. “On my arrival in the United States the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention; and the longer I stayed there, the more I perceived the great political consequences resulting from this new state of things.”
He goes on to say, “Religion in America takes no direct part in the government of society, but it must be regarded as the first of their political institutions . . . . I do not know whether all Americans have a sincere faith in their religion – for who can search the human heart? – but I am certain that they hold it to be indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions. This opinion is not peculiar to a class of citizens or to a party, but it belongs to the whole nation and to every rank of society.”
“I sought for the greatness and genius of America in her commodious harbors and her ample rivers, and it was not there; in her fertile fields and boundless prairies, and it was not there; in her rich mines and her vast world commerce, and it was not there. Not until I went to the churches of America and heard her pulpits aflame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because she is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”
Let me close with another quote, similar to de Tocqueville‟s, also by a famous person, but with a very different slant. “America is like a healthy body, and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within.” Guess who said it? Joseph Stalin! It behooves us as patriots to be aware of the enemy‟s agenda. And this misapplication of the first amendment to our Constitution is not coincidental – it is part of a deliberate plan to weaken and eventually destroy our great country.
For a list of the resources I consulted for this presentation, please email me and I’ll get them for you.
I can‟t recall hearing this phrase used in any way other than in the context of keeping morality and religious expression out of civic matters. For instance,
You can‟t pray in school today because of “the separation of church and state.”
You can‟t have a statue of the 10 commandments in a courthouse in Alabama because of “the separation of church and state.”
You can‟t have a nativity scene on the courthouse lawn in many communities because of “the separation of church and state.”
You can‟t have a Christmas concert in the school, it has to be a Holiday Concert – because of the separation of church and state.
To say that this phrase is greatly misunderstood is quite an understatement, so in our talk tonight I want to show you where this idea came from, emphasize where it did not come from, what freedom of religion means, what freedom of religion does not mean, and then we‟ll end by looking at early American history to see how our founding fathers felt about it all. Sound like a plan?
Where did this concept of separation of church and state come from? Most people think it is found in the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States. That is incorrect. The way the first amendment reads is, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .” How many of you heard the phrase “separation of church and state” in that sentence?
Here is something we need to understand with great clarity. This phrase, “the separation of church and state” is not found in one single governing document of the United States! It isn‟t found in the Constitution, or the First Amendment, or the Declaration of Independence, or any other official document pertinent to the founding of our Country.
As I said, most Americans believe that it is actually taken from our constitution. Listen to this very sad conversation between the Christian historian David Barton, and a U.S. Congressman who was an accomplished attorney. They were discussing the importance of basic religious values in society, and the Congressman said, “We know these values are important; it‟s unfortunate that we can‟t do anything to promote them.” Barton responded, “Why not?” The Congressman replied, “We just can‟t.” Barton persisted, “Why not?” The Congressman answered, “Because of „separation of church and state.‟” Barton responded, “Separation of church and state? What about it?” He replied, “It‟s in the Constitution – the Constitution won‟t permit us to have religious values in public arenas.” Barton said, “That phrase is not in the Constitution!” Forcefully, the Congressman countered, “Yes it is!” “No it isn‟t!” “Yes it is!” They went back and forth until Barton produced a copy of the Constitution and asked, “Would you please find that phrase for me?” He replied triumphantly, “I‟d be happy to.” He immediately went to the First Amendment, read it – and became very embarrassed. He said, “I can‟t believe this! In law school they always taught us that‟s what the First Amendment said!” Amazed, Barton said, “You‟ve never read the Constitution for yourself?” He replied, “We were never required to read it in law school.” This is a pretty sad commentary on our law schools, and I‟m afraid that this particular Congressman who had never read the Constitution is not an exception to the rule.
So where does this phrase come from? To answer this question, we have to go back to the 1500‟s. On October 31, 1517, the Catholic Church was rocked by what is called today the Protestant Reformation. Three monks – Martin Luther in Germany, Ulrich Zwingli in Switzerland, and John Calvin from France – all broke with the Roman Catholic Church over issues like the authority of the Pope, the use of indulgences, and what they determined to be irreparable corruption.
There was another group of men at the same time, not quite as well known, who believed Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli didn‟t go far enough in their reform efforts. One of the primary issues at stake for these men was the relationship between the church and the state. In the 1500‟s, Catholicism made the state subservient to the church (cf. how the Pope crowned kings, Henry VIII), and Protestantism (Luther, Calvin, et al.) made the church and the state co-equal. This is why the king of the country was also the head of the church. This is why when a baby was baptized, that act made him not only a member of the National church, but also a citizen of the country.
Well, there was a group of men who strongly opposed this idea of the church and the state being so closely aligned. Men like Conrad Grebel, Felix Manz, Balthasar Hubmaier, Jacob Hutter (Hutterites), Jacob Ammann (the Amish), and Menno Simmons (Mennonites). These men and those who followed their teachings were know as Anabaptists.
The Anabaptists understood with great clarity that even though God and State were closely connected and even intertwined to a great degree, there was a very clear boundary that the state could not step over. Cf. story of Jesus and the poll tax. These Anabaptist paid very dearly for their insistence on this matter because their actions and beliefs were considered treason. Yet it this insistence on the clear boundary between the church and state that has marked Baptist thought for the last 500 years, which is why on Oct. 7, 1801, The Danbury Baptist Association of Danbury, CT, sent a letter to President Thomas Jefferson expressing their concern about this matter.
The essence of their concern was this. These Baptist pastors felt that freedom of religion was an inalienable right, it had been given to them by God, not granted to them by the state. And there is a big difference between those two concepts. They were concerned that since freedom of religion was mentioned in the First Amendment of the Constitution (“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .”), that people would erroneously conclude that it was a freedom granted by the Government, and not by God. And if the Government can give us something, it can also take it away. They wanted Jefferson to clarify that freedom of religion was not something that the state could grant or suspend – it was an inalienable right.
Jefferson replied to this letter on Jan. 1, 1802 and said, “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, . . . I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should „make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,‟ thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.”
Three things to remember about this: First - this phrase, “a wall of separation between Church and State” is a phrase taken from Thomas Jefferson‟s personal correspondence to a group of Baptist pastors, not some kind of official statement. Secondly, Jefferson was simply reaffirming that the U.S. Government has no right to establish a religion for the entire nation (like the church of England of that day, or the church of Scotland of that day, etc.), or to involve itself in religious disputes, as did the European states. The “wall of separation” was for the purpose of keeping the state out of religious matters (the presence of Christ in communion). To quote him, “religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God.” The third thing to take from Jefferson‟s statement is that he was not saying, nor does the First Amendment advocate that religious matters or expressions have no place in the public square or in government. Yes, he mentions a wall between the two institutions, but that wall only stops influence in one direction! From state to church, not from church to state.
How do we know this? Because of our history and architecture. Listen to these quotes and facts that demonstrate how closely intertwined religious expression and public life was in the early days of our country. If you have ever wondered how our founding fathers felt about religious expression, here it is.
John Adams, in a letter to Thomas Jefferson on June 28, 1813 said, “The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were . . . the general principles of Christianity.” Works, Vol. X p. 45
On Oct. 11, 1789, John Adams in a speech to a group of officers in the Massachusetts Militia said, “We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion . . . Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. Works, Vol. IX p. 229
Robert Winthrop, a Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives in the 1840‟s said, “Men, in a word, must necessarily be controlled either by a power within them or by a power without them, either by the Word of God or by the strong arm of man, either by the Bible or by the bayonet.”
In George Washington‟s Farewell Address, he said, “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness – these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them.”
On the very first day after George Washington became the commander in chief of the American forces in the Revolutionary war, he issued this order: “The General most earnestly requires and expects a due observance of those articles of war established for the government of the army, which forbid profane cursing, swearing, and drunkenness. And in like manner he requires and expects of all officers and soldiers, not engaged in actual duty, a punctual attendance on Divine service, to implore the blessing of Heaven upon the means used for our safety and defense.”
Thomas Jefferson - “In our village of Charlottesville, there is a good degree of religion, with a small spice only of fanaticism. We have four sects, but without either church or meeting-house. The court-house is the common temple, one Sunday in the month to each. Here, Episcopalian and Presbyterian, Methodist and Baptist, meet together, joining in hymning their Maker, listen with attention and devotion to each others‟ preachers, and all mix in society with perfect harmony.”
As you walk up the steps to the building which houses the U..S Supreme Court you can see near the top of the building a row of the world's law givers and each one is facing one in the middle who is facing forward with a full frontal view ... It is Moses and he is holding the Ten Commandments! As you enter the Supreme Court courtroom, the two huge oak doors have the Ten Commandments engraved on each lower portion of each door. As you sit inside the courtroom, you can see the wall, right above where the Supreme Court Judges sit, a display of the Ten Commandments! There are Bible verses etched in stone all over the Federal Buildings and Monuments in Washington , D.C.
James Madison, the fourth president, known as 'The Father of Our Constitution' made the following statement: “We have staked the whole of all our political Institutions upon the capacity of mankind for Self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to The Ten Commandments of God.”
So what has happened over the last 100 years is that there has been an evolution of thought in our country. It has been fueled by an activist Supreme Court, and public opinion has swung from “government not being able to establish a national religion,” to “government not permitting religious expression in the civic arena.” As Dave Barton says, “The result is that the First Amendment is now used to prohibit the very religious activities that the Founders themselves once encouraged under the same Amendment.”
Alexis de Tocqueville was a French jurist who visited the US in 1831, and he was so impressed with what he saw that he went home and wrote one of the best studies of American culture and Constitutional system that had been published up to that point. His book was called Democracy in America, and listen to his first impression of our country in the early 1800‟s. “On my arrival in the United States the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention; and the longer I stayed there, the more I perceived the great political consequences resulting from this new state of things.”
He goes on to say, “Religion in America takes no direct part in the government of society, but it must be regarded as the first of their political institutions . . . . I do not know whether all Americans have a sincere faith in their religion – for who can search the human heart? – but I am certain that they hold it to be indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions. This opinion is not peculiar to a class of citizens or to a party, but it belongs to the whole nation and to every rank of society.”
“I sought for the greatness and genius of America in her commodious harbors and her ample rivers, and it was not there; in her fertile fields and boundless prairies, and it was not there; in her rich mines and her vast world commerce, and it was not there. Not until I went to the churches of America and heard her pulpits aflame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because she is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”
Let me close with another quote, similar to de Tocqueville‟s, also by a famous person, but with a very different slant. “America is like a healthy body, and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within.” Guess who said it? Joseph Stalin! It behooves us as patriots to be aware of the enemy‟s agenda. And this misapplication of the first amendment to our Constitution is not coincidental – it is part of a deliberate plan to weaken and eventually destroy our great country.
For a list of the resources I consulted for this presentation, please email me and I’ll get them for you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)