by
Andrew Jukes
The following studies are from the book "Law of the Offerings"
by Jukes. When it was written is not known, no date given in the
copy I have in my library. It contains a way of speaking and
writing that would indicate it is an old book. What I consider is
some fine understanding of the typology of the offerings in
ancient Israel, is therefore harder to ascertain from this
older English prose, but with some effort on the part of the
reader, the trunk of each tree presented can be found and seen,
and each one is wonderful to behold - Keith Hunt
PREFACE
HE, who spake as never man spake, opened His mouth in parables.
With His example before us, I have often been surprised that the
inspired parables of the Old Testament should have been so
neglected; the more as we see from the writings of St. Paul, not
only how closely these emblems are connected with Christ, but
also how aptly they illustrate, in simplest figures, the wondrous
truths and profound mysteries of redemption.
Some years ago, one of these Old Testament parables was made an
especial blessing to myself. This led me further; and having
learnt by personal experience the preciousness of these
emblematic Scriptures, I have since freely used them in
ministering to others the truths connected with Christ's Work and
Person.
Some months since, I gave a course of Lectures on THE OFFERINGS,
which were taken down in short-hand at the time. At the repeated
request of others, I have since corrected them as time has
allowed. They are now published in the following pages.
As to the great outlines and principles contained in them, I may
say that I have confidence that they are in the main correct:
mixed with much infirmity and weakness I doubt not; (how much few
perhaps will feel more than I do; indeed it has been the sense of
this which has so long delayed their publication;) yet still I
trust according to the mind of God, and setting forth not only a
measure of truth, but also the truth which the OFFERINGS were
intended to typify. Where they contain error, may the Lord and
His saints pardon it: where truth, may we all acknowledge it as
His, and follow it. I need not say, "I have no commandment of the
Lord." I merely "give my judgment as one that hath obtained mercy
of the Lord to be faithful."
It only remains for me to add here, that I have derived much
assistance upon this subject from a Tract entitled, "The Types of
Leviticus." I cannot follow the writer of it in his view of every
Offering. I do not know how far he would assent to the principles
I have applied to their varieties. Yet I feel that under God I am
much his debtor, I doubt not for far more than I am even
conscious of.
I now commend these pages to the Lord. May He be pleased to use
them, as shall seem good to Him, to His glory.
(Now the above is humility that I have hardly seen in many
decades. And because of it I truly believe the writer was given
some wonderful insights to the typology in the OFFERINGS of
ancient Israel. It was not God's original intention to introduce
to Israel a whole Levitical sacrificial offering system - see
Jer.7:23 - but it was needful to do so, so a carnal stiffnecked
people, could be REMINDED of sin and its effect, as Hebrews
tells us it did do, as well as the general aspect of worship
towards God. Yet in giving Israel such a vigorous offering
system, God put great meaning and figures and typology into it
all. The main and greater part I believe the writer of the
following pages and studies, has correctly expounded upon. For
us, so far from the times when these offerings were offered, they
probably seem distant and somewhat materially very outdated,
something from an ancient past that now means just about nothing
to us. So, for most reading these studies, I believe you will be
enlightened about Israel's offerings as never before. I hope you
will find the full appreciation of these insights, as I did -
Keith Hunt).
SECOND CHAPTER
THE BURNT-OFFERING
IN the preceding pages, I have endeavoured to point out the
distinctive character of the types in some of the earlier books
the Old Testament. We are now in a better position to estimate
the distinctions in the types of this book, Leviticus.
Speaking generally, the types of Leviticus as I have said, give
us the work of Christ, in its bearing on worship and communion.
We have not here, as in the earlier part of Exodus, the sprinkled
blood to redeem from Egypt; but we get definite instruction
respecting the Offering and Priest, to meet the need of a saved
people in their approaches to God their Saviour. In a word,
instead of seeing Christ as redeeming, we here see His work for
the redeemed; His work, not in bringing them out of Egypt, but in
bringing them into the place of worship, in keeping them there in
happy fellowship, and in restoring them when they fail or fall.
And how varied are the aspects of Christ's work, viewed merely in
this one relation. To bold communion with God, the redeemed need
Christ as the Offering; and this is the first view we get of Him
in Leviticus: but they need Him also as THE PRIEST and Mediator;
and therefore this is also another aspect in which He is
presented to us. And so we might go on step by step in the
consideration of the blessed work of Jesus, passing from one part
to another of His service in keeping up and restoring the
communion of His redeemed.
The work of Christ, then, as connected with the communion of His
people, may, and indeed, if fully apprehended, must be viewed
under many different representations. The offering is the first
representation; the PRIEST, in close connexion with it, the
second; because it is under these two great aspects that the
redeemed in communion with God have most to do with Jesus. At
present I purpose going no further than Christ viewed as the
Offering. Christ as the key to the dispensations, as we see Him
in the types of Genesis; - Christ as the ground of redemption, as
shewn in the book of Exodus: - Christ the rearer of the
tabernacle, and the substance of its many services; - Christ the
guide of His people, whether through the wilderness or into the
land over Jordan; - Christ as the rejected king while another
holds His kingdom: Christ as the glorious king who builds the
temple in Jerusalem: - all these and many other aspects of the
work and person of our blessed Lord will, for the present, in
some measure be held in abeyance, that we may more particularly
enter into this one aspect, this first aspect of Christ, as
connected with communion, CHRIST THE SUM OF THE OFFERINGS.
And how much is there to arrest and instruct us in this one
simple view of Him. He IS the BURNT-offering, the MEAT-offering,
the PEACE-offering, the SIN-offering, and the TRESPASS-offering
for His people (see Heb.10:4-10). By His one oblation of Himself
once offered, He has stood in all these different relations, -
relations so precious to God, that through preceding ages He had
the representation of them constantly presented to Him, relations
so needful to the Church, that it is on the apprehension of them
that her joy and strength depend. And yet how great a proportion
of believers have neither knowledge nor wish to trace these. They
read of Him as the Sin-offering and the Burnt-offering; but no
corresponding thought is suggested to them by this distinction.
It is enough for them that the blood has been sprinkled on the
door-post; and they care not to know more of Him who sprinkled
it.
But these are not God's thoughts, nor are they the thoughts of
those who know the joy of communion with Him. Such go from
strength to strength in the knowledge of the grace and work of
Jesus. Have they known Him as the paschal lamb in Egypt? They
seek then to know Him as the offering within the tabernacle. Have
they learnt Him in His different relations as offering? They seek
to know Him in all His offices as priest. Do they know Him as
priest? They seek Him as prophet, as manna, as water, as guide,
as everything. May the Lord only fill us with His Spirit: then
we cannot but follow on to know more of Jesus.
But it is time we should turn to THE OFFERINGS.
In approaching them I would make a general observation or two on
some particulars which are common to all the Offerings, the right
understanding of which may lead us to a clearer apprehension of
the principle on which they must be interpreted. Without definite
thoughts on each of these particulars, the various types will be
little more than unmeaning repetition to us.
(l.) The first point:
then, which requires our notice is this: In each offering there
are at least three distinct objects presented to us. There is the
offering, the priest, the offerer. A definite knowledge of the
precise import of each of these is absolutely requisite if we
would understand the offerings.
What, then, is the offering? What the priest? What the offerer?
Christ is the offering, Christ is the priest, Christ is the
offerer. Such and so manifold are the relations in which Christ
has stood for man and to man, that no one type or set of types
can adequately represent the fullness of them. Thus we have many
distinct classes of types, and further variations in these
distinct classes, each of which gives us one particular view of
Christ, either in His character, or in His work, or person. But
see Him as we may for sinners, He fills more than one relation.
This causes the necessity of many emblems. First He comes as
offerer, but we cannot see the offerer without the offering, and
the offerer is Himself the offering, and He who is both offerer
and offering is also the priest. As man under the law, our
substitute, Christ, stood for us towards God as offerer. He took
"the body prepared for Him" as His offering, that in it and by it
He might reconcile us to God. Thus, when sacrifice and offering
had wholly failed, when at man's hand God would no more accept
them, "then said He, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is
written of me, I delight to do Thy will, 0 God: yea, Thy law is
within my heart" (Heb.10:5-9; Ps. 40:6-8). Thus His body was
His offering: He willingly offered it; and then as priest He took
the blood into the holiest. As offerer, we see Him man under the
law, standing our substitute, for us to fulfil all righteous-
ness. As priest, we have Him presented as the mediator, God's
messenger between Himself and Israel. While as the offering He is
seen the innocent victim, a sweet savour to God, yet bearing the
sin and dying for it.
Thus in the selfsame type the offerer sets forth Christ in His
person, as the One who became man to meet God's requirements: the
offering presents Him in His character and work, as the victim by
which the atonement was ratified: while the priest gives us a
third picture of Him, in His official relation, as the appointed
mediator and intercessor. Accordingly, when we have a type in
which the offering is most prominent, the leading thought will be
Christ the victim. On the other hand, when the offerer or priest
predominates, it will respectively be Christ as man or Christ as
mediator. Connected with this there is also another particular,
the import of which must be known to understand the Offerings.
I refer to the laying of the offerer's hands on the head of the
victim offered. This act in itself was nothing more than the
expression of the identity of the offerer and offering. In each
case the giving up of the offering represented the surrender of
the person of the offerer. The offering, whatever it might be,
stood for, and was looked upon as identical with the offerer.
In the one case, in the sweet savour offerings, it represented
the offerer as an accepted worshipper, wholly surrendering
himself upon the altar of the Lord, to be a sweet savour to
Jehovah. In the other case, as in the sin and trespass offerings,
where the offerer came as a sinner with confession, the offerer
in his offering surrendered himself as a sinner to God's
judgment, and was cast out as accursed into the wilderness. We
know Him who stood in both these relations, when in the body
prepared for Him "He gave Himself."
(2.) Another particular:
to which I would direct attention respects the differences
between the several offerings. These differences are not a
secondary matter. The very definiteness and distinct character of
the particular offerings is wholly involved in them. Any
nonapprehension, therefore, or misapprehension on this point,
must necessarily leave us in much uncertainty.
As to these differences, then, there are first several different
offerings, as the Burnt-offering, the Meat-offering, the
Peace-offering, etc.; and secondly, there are different grades of
the same offering, as the burnt-offering of the herd, the
burnt-offering of the flock, the burnt-offering of fowls; the
peace-offering of the herd, the peace-offering of the flock, etc.
The question is, or rather it is no question - have these
distinctions any meaning corresponding to them? With regard to
all the great outlines in these typical ordinances, every
Christian is satisfied that they represent Jesus; yet some doubt
whether we are justified in expecting to find Him in every
distinct and minute particular. And the fancies which have been
vented upon this subject have, indeed, been enough to warn us.
Still, my answer to such doubts is simply this: Are not the
particulars, as all Scripture, "written for our learning;" and
can they be so if the words are without import, if they are meant
to reveal nothing to us? But no. This God's representation of the
work of His Beloved will bear looking at as much as His other
works. Doubtless here, where every addition is but to depict
Christ's fullness, each minutest particular, each variety, has a
meaning attached to it. God's words are not here, more than
elsewhere, vain words. It is only our want of spiritual
apprehension which makes these things so mysterious to us. The
shadow may, indeed, be more dark than the substance, but for
every shadow there must be a substance; and he that best knows
the substance and reality will soonest recognise its darkened
shadow. And just as the shadow of this our earth, as it passes
over the face of another planet, leads the instructed eye by a
glance to the knowledge of facts respecting the form and
proportions of the globe we dwell on; so often does the
apprehension of one of these shadows which God has marked as cast
from the work of Jesus, reveal Him and His work to His people in
a way which no less delights than it astonishes them.
The fact is, the true secret respecting the difficulty of the
types is, that we are not sufficiently acquainted with the
reality, and as a consequence, the representation of that reality
is unintelligible or almost unintelligible to us. Only let us see
more of Christ; only let us, in God's presence, learn more of Him
in all His relations; and then the things which God has thought
worthy a place in His Word, because they represent something
which may be seen of Jesus, will find an answering place in our
intelligence, because they will each find a response in our
experience.
But to speak of these differences. I have not a doubt that they
are intended to represent different aspects of Christ's
offering. I cannot say how far the proof of this may commend
itself to those who are comparatively strangers to such
questions, for here as elsewhere a certain measure of previous
intelligence is required to enable us rightly to estimate the
value of the proof submitted to us. In this field of knowledge
too, as in others of a kindred nature, the proof of a fact may be
more difficult than the discovery of it; and again, the
demonstration of the proof to those unaccustomed to such
questions, far more difficult than the demonstration of the fact
itself. I doubt not it will be so in this case. I am, however,
satisfied as to the fact; I will now endeavour, as briefly as may
be, to express what proof may be given of it.
To do this I must again advert to what has already been said
respecting the OFFERER and OFFERING. We have seen that the
offerer is Christ, standing as man under the law to fulfil all
righteousness. We have seen that the offering represents His
body, and the laying on of hands the identity of the offering and
offerer. Now in these types we have this offerer and His offering
both presented to us in very different circumstances. The
faithful Israelite is seen in different aspects, and according to
the aspect in which he is regarded, so is his offering dealt
with.
In one we see him standing as a sinless offerer, offering a
sweet-smelling savour for acceptance. In another he stands as a
convicted sinner, offering an expiatory sacrifice which bears the
penalty of his offenses.
Now the offering of Christ, which all these shadows typify, was
but one, and but once offered; but the shadows vary in shape and
outline according to the point from whence, and the light in
which, they are looked upon. In other words, the one offering had
several aspects, and each aspect required a separate picture. Had
Christ's fullness and relations been less manifold, fewer emblems
might have sufficed to represent them; but as they are many, and
each to be variously apprehended, no one emblem, however perfect,
could depict them all. As priest, or offering, or offerer, He
fills a distinct relation, the representation of which
necessarily requires a distinct emblem. Yet in each of these
relations He may be variously seen, and each of these variations
will again require a different picture.
Thus as priest He may be seen interceding with God, or sprinkling
the leper, or taking in the blood. It is plain that the emblem
which might set forth one of these would by no means present
another relation of Him. But God's will is that all His relations
should be seen; and the consequence is types many and various.
With respect, then, to the varieties in the offerings, I conclude
that they are but different aspects of Christ's work or person.
Let us now advance a step further and inquire, What are the
different grades which we find in the different offerings?
Without doubt these proceed on the same principle. They are but
different views of this or that peculiar aspect. Not only is
Christ's work one which has many aspects, but each aspect may be
very differently apprehended, according to the measure of
intelligence possessed by those who look at Him. Thus there may
be different apprehensions of the same relation, and of the
selfsame act in the same relation. For instance, as the offering,
one grade of it is the bullock, another the lamb, another the
turtle-dove. Now each of these emblems gives us a different
thought respecting the value or character of the selfsame
offering. One grade shews Christ, and one saint sees Him, as an
offering "of the herd," that is the most costly offering. Another
gives a lower view of its value, or at least a different view of
its character, as in the grade of "the turtle-dove."
In every grade, the lowest as much as the highest, the offering
is seen to be free from blemish: in every grade it is seen a
sufficient offering, meeting all the requirements of the
sacrifice; but the riches of the offerer, and the value and
distinct character of his offering, are very differently
apprehended in the different pictures.
I conclude, therefore, that as the different offerings give us
different aspects or relations of Christ's one offering, so the
different grades in the same offering give us different views or
apprehensions of the same aspect.
An illustration may perhaps better express the difference.
Suppose, then, several aspects of some building, the north
aspect, the south aspect, the west aspect; these would correspond
with the different offerings, as the burnt-offering, the
meat-offering, etc. But there might be three or four views of the
building taken from the same side, but under different lights,
and at different distances: this would be the different grades in
the same offering.
And the analogy of the other parts of Scripture directly supports
this interpretation; for the different books, as we have seen,
looked at typically, do but bring out different aspects or
measures of apprehension of that great and perfect work of which
all Scripture testifies. One book gives the experience of Egypt;
another the experience of the wilderness; another the experience
of the land. All these by one act of Jesus are true for the
Church in Him; but they are not all equally apprehended; for our
experience always comes far short of the reality, and the reality
may be apprehended in very different measures....And this measure
of apprehension may vary, though the work apprehended be the
same.
...............
TO BE CONTINUED
|
No comments:
Post a Comment