The surgeon's lance may have pained us, but now we are tranquil through the relief afforded.-S. R. A.

Vers. 1, 2.-The peril of privilege. Was it, then, necessary to contemplate the possibility of Aaron's dying at his post? Was he, the chosen servant of God, who had been so solemnly inducted into his office (chs. viii., ix.), in actual peril of death as he ministered unto the Lord? Could he draw too near to God, so as to endanger his very life? It was even so. His two sons, Nadab and Abihu, had paid the extreme penalty of their sin in the service of Jehovah; "they offered before the Lord, and died" at their post. And if Aaron had violated the precepts here given, it is certain that from "the cloud upon the mercy seat" would have flashed the fatal fire which would have destroyed the high priest himself. We are not afraid now (1) of such condign and signal punishment as befell the sons of Aaron: God does not visit us thus in these days; nor (2) of coming too often or drawing too near to God. The barriers which then stood between the manifested Deity and the common people are removed. We may come at all times" to the mercy-seat, and are in much greater peril of God's displeasure for "restraining prayer," than for intruding into his presence without need. Nevertheless, privilege has its own peculiar peril, and the penalty is very serious: it is death; not physical, but spiritual, eternal death. There may be in our case

66

66

I. PRESUMPTION FROM OFFICIAL POSITION. It is only too possible that those who "offer before the Lord" may come to regard their official duties as things which avail before him, independently of the spirit in which they are rendered. Many will say, . . . . have we not prophesied in thy Name... and in thy Name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you" (Matt. vii. 22, 23). Many may say, "Have we not preached thy gospel, taught thy truth, evangelized in thy Name?" etc., and-trusting in their official works instead of looking to their inner spirit, and instead of attaching themselves to Christ in penitence and faith-be condemned at his bar.

II. FORMALISM FROM FAMILIARITY. It is all too possible for those who "offer before the Lord" to die a spiritual death, because they lose all real and living appreciation of the things they say and do. There is a subtle but powerful tendency in the human mind to do mechanically and unintelligently that with which it is exceedingly familiar. Not even the most sacred words or solemn rites are proof against it. We may, at the desk, or pulpit, or even at the table of the Lord, take words upon our lips which find no answer in the soul. We may be obnoxious to our Lord's reproach (Matt. xv. 8). To use sacred language without sacred feeling is to move away from the fountain of life; to have entered the precincts of habitual formalism is to have passed the outer portals of the kingdom of death.

III. DISOBEDIENCE FROM DISREGARD TO THE WILL OF GOD. We are not bound to a rigid correspondence with every minute New Testament practice. There are some matters in which changed circumstances demand other methods. But we are bound to search the Scriptures to find the will of our Lord in the worship we render and the work we do for him. If we follow nothing better than "the traditions of men," or our own tastes and inclinations, we may find ourselves in the wilderness-a long way from the water of life.

Whatever position we occupy in the Church of Christ, however much of " the honour that cometh from man we may enjoy, it is essential that we: 1. Cherish the spirit of humility, and exercise a living faith in Jesus Christ. 2. Realize the truth we speak, and spiritually participate in the services we conduct. 3. Have supreme regard to the will of our Master, seeking to learn that will as devoutly, patiently, studiously, as we can. These things must we do "that we die not" before the Lord.-C.

Vers. 2-17.-Type and antitype-the priest. The high priest offering sacrifices for the sin of the people was a clear type of " the High Priest of our profession," who offered the one sacrifice for sin, who became the Propitiation for our sin, even for the sins of the whole world (1 John ii. 2). We have

He

J. FOUR FEATURES OF RESEMBLANCE. 1. Aaron acted under Divine direction. was appointed by God to take the post he took, and was charged to do everything he

did. He might not deviate in any particular from the instructions which came from heaven. "Aaron shall" is the continually recurring strain; almost every other verse contains this formula; departure from direction was utter failure in his work and death to himself (ver. 2). 2. Aaron divested himself of his rich attire-he wore not the ephod with precious stones, nor the mitre glittering with golden crown; this splendid attire he laid by on this occasion, and he put on the simple linen coat, and was girded with a linen girdle, and wore a linen mitre (ver. 4). 3. Aaron did his priestly work alone. "There shall be no man in the tabernacle when he goeth in . . . until he come out" (ver. 17). No other foot but his might enter within the vail; no other hand but his might sprinkle the blood on the mercy-seat. 4. Aaron bore a heavy burden for the people. "So laborious and trying was his work that, after it was over, the people gathered round him with sympathy and congratulation that he was brought through it in safety." So Christ, the great antitype, (1) was appointed of God (Heb. v. 4, 5); he was "the Anointed," the Sent One; he "came to do his Father's will," and though under no such minute commandments as those which regulated the actions of Aaron, he was ever consulting the will of the Father, doing "nothing of himself" (John v. 19-30; viii. 28; ix. 4). (2) Divested himself of the robe of his divinity, and put on the frail garment of our humanity (John i. 14; Heb. ii. 14; Phil. ii. 7). (3) Trod the winepress alone." "Ye shall leave me alone," said he (John xvi. 32). and alone he agonized in the garden, and alone he suffered and died on the cross. His was a most lonely life, for not even his most loved disciple understood the meaning of his mission; and his was a lonely death, none of those who stood weeping by bein able to take any part in the sacrificial work he then wrought out. (4) Bore so heavy a burden for us that his heart broke beneath it.

II. THREE POINTS OF CONTRAST. 1. Aaron was compelled to present offerings for himself (vers. 6, 11-14). 2. Had to present an offering that was provided for him; a bullock had to be brought from the herds of Israel (ver. 6), or he would have been a priest without an offering. 3. Could offer no availing sacrifice for deliberate transgressions presumptuous sin had already paid the penalty of death. But Christ Jesus, our Great High Priest, (1) needed not to present any sacrifice for himself; the holy, harmless, undefiled One, separate from sinners, did not need to offer up sacrifices first for his own sins (Heb. vii. 26, 27). (2) Had no need to procure a victim, for himself

... came down to be

The offering and the priest."

He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself (Heb. ix. 26). (3) Offered a sacrifice which avails for all sin. His blood "cleanseth us from all sin" (1 John i. 7 ; 1 Cor. vi. 11; Eph. i. 7; Heb. ix. 14; vii. 25, etc.).—C.

Vers. 7-10, 15, 21, 22.-Type and antitype-the offering. The most striking feature of the whole service on the great Day of Atonement was the action of the high priest in regard to the two goats brought to the tabernacle door (ver. 7). They clearly point to that "Lamb of God" who came to "take away the sin of the world" (John i. 29). That there were two goats rather than one presents no difficulty at all; there might well have been more than one to typify the Sacrifice which they foreshadowed.

We learn

I. THAT GOD ADMITS VICARIOUS SUFFERING INTO HIS RIGHTEOUS REALM. The innocent goat would shed its blood, would pour out its life, that the guilty human souls might not die, but live. It was a Divine appointment, and shows clearly that the propitiatory element was allowed by the Holy One of Israel. The vicarious principle has a large place in the kingdom of God on earth. Involuntarily and also voluntarily we suffer for others and others for us. Man bears the penal consequences of his brother's sin. He does so when he cannot avoid so doing; and he does so frequently with his own full consent; indeed, by going far out of his way on purpose to bear it. Vicarious suffering runs through the whole human economy. But there is only One who could possibly take on himself the penalty of the world's sin-only One on whom could possibly be "laid the iniquity of us all." That one is the spotless "Lamb of God," that Son of God who became sin for man; he, "for the suffering of death was made a little lower than the angels," and took on him a mortal form. "Surely he

LEVITICUS.

8

hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows; he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities," etc. (Isa. liii. 4, 5; 1 Pet. ii. 24).

TION.

II. THAT THE SACRIFICE OF CHRIST AVAILS TO REMOVE COMPLETELY ALL CONDEMNAWhen the children of Israel saw the live goat, over whose head their sins had been confessed, being led away into the waste wilderness where it would never more be seen (ver. 22), they had a very vivid assurance made through their senses to their soul that "their transgressions were forgiven, and their sins covered." No such dramatic assurance have we now, but we may have the utmost confidence that our sins are forgiven us for his Name's sake;" that "there is no condemnation to us who are in Christ Jesus," to us "who have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins" (Acts xiii. 39; Rom. v. 9). Trusting in the slain Lamb of God, we may see, by the eye of faith, all our guilt and all our condemnation borne away into the land of forgetfulness, where God will remember it no more for ever.

III. THAT NO SACRIFICE WILL AVAIL ANYTHING WITHOUT ACTIVE PARTICIPATION ON OUR PART. Useless and unavailing altogether the slaying of the one goat and the sending away of the other without the act of confession and the imposition of hands by the high priest (ver. 21); this part of the solemn ceremonial was essential; apart from that everything would have been vain. And without our personal spiritual participation the sacrifice of the Lamb of God will be all in vain. 1. There must be the confession of our sin; a confession of sin which springs from contrition for sin, and is attended by a determination to put all sin away (repentance). 2. Faith in the Divine Redeemer. "Our faith must lay its hand on that dear head of his." 3. And this must be the action of our own individual soul. Whatever guidance and encouragement we may gain from the ministers of Christ, we ourselves must repent and believe.-C.

Vers. 29-31.-The great anniversary-sacred seasons. The Jews had other special days beside the Day of Atonement. They had their weekly sabbath, the new moon sacrifices, their festivals or "holy convocations" (ch. xxiii.), etc. But this was the "grand climacteric;" there were "high days" during the year, but this was the day of the year to every devout Israelite. No other was comparable to it in solemnity and sacred importance. Several features of peculiar interest combined to raise it above all other occasions. 1. It was the one annual solemnity prescribed by the Law. 2. It was a day of perfect rest from labour (vers. 29, 31). 3. It was the one day of universal fasting enjoined or encouraged in the Law (vers. 29, 31). 4. It was a day of selfexamination and spiritual humiliation (ver. 29). 5. On that day the high priest went perilously near to the manifested presence of God-then, and then only, entering within the vail, and standing in presence of the mercy-seat and the mysterious, awful Shechinah (ver. 12). 6. On that day unusual sacrifices were offered unto the Lord, and a striking spectacle witnessed by the whole camp, the live goat being led away into the wilderness (ver. 21). 7. Then, also, the people felt themselves in an unusually blessed relation to Jehovah-free, as at no other time, from all their sin; they were "clean from all their sins before the Lord" (ver. 30). We may, therefore, well pronounce this the great anniversary of the Hebrew Church. It must have had hallowing influences in both directions of time: it must have been anticipated with interest and awe; it must have left behind it sacred shadows of holy feeling-of unity, reverence, joy in God. The holding of this anniversary "by statute for ever" suggests to usI. THAT IN CHRIST JESUS THE OBSERVANCE OF DAYS IS AN OPTIONAL THING. There are valid grounds for believing that it is the will of Christ we should observe the Lord's day as the disciples of him who is "the Resurrection and the Life." But the enforcement of the observance of sacred days by statute binding on the Christian conscience is expressly disallowed (Gal. iv. 10, 11; Rom. xiv. 5, 6; Col. ii. 16).

II. THAT IT IS WISE, AS A MATTER OF CHRISTIAN LIBERTY, TO OBSERVE SOME ANNIVERSARIES. God has, in his providential arrangements, made certain points to be regularly recurring. Time is so measured that we must be periodically reminded of interesting events. God put the lights in the firmament in order that they might not only "give light upon the earth," but that they might be "for signs and for seasons, and for days and for years" (Gen. i. 14). 1. A Church should observe: (1) the day of its institution, or (2) the day on which it was conscious of revival, or (3) any particular day which is, to itself, fruitful of sacred suggestions. 2. Individual Christian men may

observe (1) the last day of the old year, (2) the first day of the new year, (3) the anniversary of their birthday, or (4) the anniversary of the day which has the most hallowed associations to their mind, the day of religious decision or that of reception into the visible Church of Christ.

III. THAT THERE IS A TWOFOLD USE WE MAY MAKE OF SUCH ANNIVERSARIES. 1. Solemn retrospect; with careful retreading of past experiences, free and full acknowledgment of God's goodness and our own manifold shortcomings, simple faith in the Divine promise of forgiveness through Christ. 2. Thoughtful forecast; with studious consideration of what may yet be done for the Master and mankind, devout reconsecration of self to the service of the Saviour, believing prayer for Divine guidance aud guardianship through future years.-C.

Vers. 33, 34.-The imperfect ritual and the All-sufficient Sacrifice. If we place onrselves at the standpoint of a devout and inquiring Hebrew worshipper, we can suppose ourselves to ask, on the morning and evening of the Day of Atonement

I. WHY THIS ANNUAL CEREMONY? Have not numerous sacrifices been presented all the year round without intermission? Have not daily offerings been laid on the altar, morning and evening? and double sacrifices every sabbath day? and special offerings every month? And have not the people been bringing their presentations, from flock and herd, as piety has dictated, or special circumstances have required, all through the seasons? Have not these "come up with acceptance" before the altar of Jehovah? Has not sin been atoned for? What need, then, of these annual solemnities, of this very special ceremony at the tabernacle?

And if to such reflecting worshipper it should occur that the blood of lambs and bullocks, of doves and pigeons, was no real substitute for the forfeited life of men, would he not take a further step in his inquiry, and ask—

II. CAN THIS SUFFICE, ALL OTHER FAILING? What is there in the ceremonies of this sacred day which will avail, if all the year's sacrifices are insufficient? Will the fact that one man will stand in the inner instead of the outer side of a separating vail, and sprinkle blood on one article of tabernacle furniture rather than another,-will this make the difference between the adequacy and the inadequacy of animal sacrifice for human sin? Will the ceremony of slaying one goat and leading the other out into the wilderness constitute the one needful thing that is wanted to remove the guilt of a nation? Surely something more and something greater is wanted still. To these suggested and probable inquiries of the Hebrew worshipper, we reply

III. THESE TYPICAL SOLEMNITIES DID NOT SUFFICE. It was a striking mark of their insufficiency that the very altar and tabernacle of the congregation, even the "holy sanctuary" itself (ver. 33; see ver. 16 and Heb. iv. 21), had to be "atoned for." Even they became affected by the "uncleanness of the children of Israel." Here was imperfection legibly written on the holy things. And our instructed reason tells us that these things were inherently unsatisfactory. "It is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins" (Heb. x. 4). Such "gifts and sacrifices could not make him that did the service perfect" (Heb. ix. 9; vii. 18, 19). They only served for a time, and drew their temporary sufficiency from the fact that they were to be completed and fulfilled in one Divine Offering, which should be presented in "the fulness of time." And thus we come to

IV. THE ONE ALL-AVAILING SACRIFICE. In the one Great Sacrifice at Calvary, the death of the Lord Jesus Christ, there is everything which a guilty race requires. 1. No need, now, for annual sacrifices; "in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year" (Heb. x. 3). "But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever," etc., "by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified" (Heb. x. 14). Not "once a year," but once for all, once for ever! 2. No need for purifying the holy place. He hath passed into the heavens; has sat down at the right hand of God. The "uncleanness" of man cannot stain his throne of grace. 3. No question as to the efficacy of his atonement. "If the blood of bulls and of goats," etc. (Heb. ix. 13, 14). 4. No limit to the application of his atoning death. The cross of Christ is that on which not merely "all the people of the congregation" (ver. 33), but all human souls in every land and through every age may look, in which they may glory, at which they may leave their sin and fear, from which they may date their inextinguishable hope and their everlasting joy.-C.

CHAPTER XVII.

EXPOSITION.

This chapter finds its natural place here as the supplement of all that has gone before. The first part of the book contains the institution or regulation of the sacrificial system (chs. i-vii.). This chapter, therefore, which gives injunctions as to the place where all sacrifices are to be offered, might well, as Knobel has remarked, have taken its place as ch. viii. The second part contains the institution of the hereditary priesthood (chs. viii.-x.). This chapter, therefore, which forbids for the future all offering of sacrifices in the open fields, and commands that they shall be brought "unto the priest, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation," would still more fitly find its place after ch. x. But the first two sections of the third part (chs. xi.-xvi.) contain the laws and rules respecting cleansing from ceremonial defilement, and this cleansing is to be mainly effected by the means of sacrifice. Therefore the rule as to the place where sacrifice shall be offered is most naturally given here, where it is found (ch. xvii.), forming a close not only to Parts I. and II., but also to the two sections of Part III., which contain the regulations as to purification by sacrifice. It is altogether a mistake to make a Second Book begin with ch. xvii., as is done by Lange and Keil.

ing of domestic animals, difficult to carry out in any case, would become impossible to obey after the camp had been expanded into a nation, and it is therefore supposed that it is by anticipation repealed in Deut. xii. 15 ("Notwithstanding thou mayest kill and eat flesh in all thy gates, whatsoever thy soul lusteth after, according to the blessing of the Lord thy God which he hath given thee "), while the regulations as to restricting the offering of sacrifice to the court of the temple, and as to pouring blood on the earth, are there emphatically enforced. This view of the text is erroneous, and must be rejected. The injunction does not refer to the ordinary slaughter of domestic animals for food, but only to sacrifices. Hitherto it had been the right and the duty of the head of each family to offer sacrifice for his household, and this he did wherever he thought proper, according to the ancient patriarchal practice, and most naturally in the open fields. This duty and liberty is now abolished. The Aaronic priesthood has superseded the older priestly system, and henceforth every sacrifice is to be offered in the court of the tabernacle, and by the hand of Aaron's sons. change was most momentous, but it could not but be made after the consecration of Aaron and his sons for an hereditary priesthood. A second reason for the change being made was the immediate danger to which a rude and superstitious people was exposed, of offering the parts which they were bound to set aside for the altar of God to some other deity, if God's priests and altar were not at hand. The imaginations of the Israelites, corrupted by their stay in Egypt, peopled the fields with beings answering to the Pan and the satyrs of the Greeks; and to these the sacred portions of the animals slaughtered elsewhere than at the tabernacle were offered.

The

The first injunction contained in the chapter (vers. 2-7) is very generally understood to mean that while the Israelites lived in the wilderness, all animals fit for sacrifices which were slain for food should be so far regarded as sacrifices that they should be brought to the door of the tabernacle and slain in the court, an offering of the blood and fat being made to the Lord. Thus the ordinary slaughtering of domestic animals, it is said, became sanctified, and the dignity of life made clear: God is the Lord of life; he Ver. 3.-What man soever there be of the gave it, and it must not be taken away house of Israel, that killeth an ox, or lamb, unless the blood, which is the vehicle of or goat. The use of the word killeth, instead life, be offered to him by being presented of sacrificeth, is one of the chief causes of sacrificially on his altar, or, where this is the error referred to above, which represents not possible, as in the case of wild animals, this command as applying to the slaughter of domestic animals. But it is always perby being reverently covered with earth. missible to use a generic in place of a Such a rule as this respecting the slaughter-specific term, and its use proves nothing.