BibleTools

Topical Studies

 A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z


What the Bible says about Burnt Offering
(From Forerunner Commentary)

Genesis 3:13-15

Abel brought an acceptable offering to God, while Cain—who must have heard the same instructions—did not. One possible explanation for Cain's inappropriate offering can be inferred from these verses.

We recognize verse 15 as a prophecy regarding the Messiah to come, whom Satan would bruise yet ultimately suffer crushing defeat. But did Cain understand this? Could he have thought the "Seed"—the offspring—of the woman referred to him? After all, he was the seed of Eve. Along these same lines, when Seth was born, Eve gave him that name because "God has appointed another seed for me instead of Abel, whom Cain killed" (Genesis 4:25; emphasis ours). Her focus was still on her seed, and undoubtedly, the prophecy of the Seed who would "bruise the head" of Satan was still on her mind after her first two sons were precluded from fulfilling it.

Is it possible that Cain saw himself as the great protagonist, the conqueror of Satan? Did Cain have a "Messiah complex," inserting himself into this prophecy? Did he assume that this prophecy must come to pass in his day, and thus, he must be the object of it? This is only a theory, but if it is true, it answers a great deal.

If Cain believed that he was the promised Seed, it may explain the offering he gave. It was of the "fruit of the ground," meaning some sort of grain, pointing to his making a meal offering. The meal offering symbolizes a man's wholehearted commitment to his fellow man and is associated with the last six of the Ten Commandments. It is appallingly ironic, then, that following his offering, Cain coveted Abel's acceptance, killed his fellow man, dishonored his parents, and then lied to God by rhetorically asking, "Am I my brother's keeper?" (Genesis 4:9). He may have brought an offering that symbolized devotion to his fellow man, but his heart was far from being devoted to much of anything except himself.

Additionally, in God's instructions, the meal offering could only be offered after the whole burnt offering was given, symbolizing a person's wholehearted devotion to God (parallel to the first four commandments). The lesson behind these two offerings is that a man cannot be truly devoted to his brother without first being fully devoted to God. To offer the meal offering without the burnt offering is saying, in effect, that one could have a good relationship with one's neighbor without the proper worship of God. The offerings teach that this is impossible, and the story of Cain demonstrates the result of trying.

Moreover, before a person could offer either the burnt or the meal offering, he first had to offer a sin offering to acknowledge his sins and to make propitiation (in type). In the symbolism, just as trying to be devoted to one's neighbor without properly worshipping God first is futile, so is trying to be devoted to either God or man without first acknowledging sin and seeking atonement and forgiveness. Yet it appears that this is exactly what Cain was signifying with his offering.

God's intent behind blood sacrifices was to remind people of sin and point to the need for a Savior. Abel fulfilled this by offering "of the firstborn of his flock." By not offering a blood sacrifice, Cain was essentially saying that he did not need to be reminded of sin or to consider a Savior. Did he act this way because he believed that he was the Savior? The Savior would not need to atone for his own sin.

If he believed he was the Messiah, it would also explain his extreme reaction when God corrected him. If Cain had been poor in spirit, meek, or pure in heart, he would have taken the correction, repented, changed, and moved on. However, his angry reaction does not indicate a willingness to learn but only a desire to be "right." God's rebuke, then, would have come as quite a shock—after all, why should the promised Seed be rebuked?

His reaction may indicate one whose dream had just been shattered, who has suddenly come face to face with the sinful reality about himself. Even then, it was a reality he was unwilling to accept, seen in the fact that he destroyed the other human witness and then lied to the Judge. These are the actions of a self-centered man who felt deeply threatened. Who he thought he was—his position, his image, his role—was threatened, causing him to respond so defensively.

David C. Grabbe
Cain's Assumption (Part Two)

Genesis 4:1-8

What caused Cain to be brutally angry and to look so sad and despondent? Was this merely a temper tantrum over his offering not being accepted? Was it jealousy because his younger brother found greater favor and acceptance in God's eyes? Why would an incident like this hold such tremendous gravity in Cain's mind? Why was the rejection of his offering so distressing to him—distressing enough that he was willing to commit murder—and then lie to the all-knowing God? Why did this event turn his world upside-down and cause him to lash out so violently?

Interestingly, where Genesis 4:3 reads, ". . . in the process of time it came to pass," the most literal translation is, "it came to pass at the end of days," meaning "at an appointed time." It is possible, then, that this may have been a Sabbath or holy day offering.

The account of Abel's faith in Hebrews 11:4 adds to the story:

By faith Abel offered to God a more excellent [acceptable] sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts; and through it he being dead still speaks.

Romans 10:17 instructs that "faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." If Abel offered something by faith, it means he followed the words or instructions that came from God. The fact that Abel's sacrifice was "acceptable" while Cain's was not suggests a standard by which these sacrifices were judged. Thus, Hebrews 11:4 means that Abel was instructed on what sort of offering was appropriate, and by following those instructions by faith, his offering was accepted, and he was declared righteous. The fact that God rebuked Cain means that he, too, knew what was required but for some reason chose to ignore it.

A couple of possibilities exist regarding what instructions Cain and Abel had been given to define what was acceptable and required. First, God may have instructed Adam, Eve, Cain, and Abel about the same sacrificial system He added to the Old Covenant in Moses' day. The Bible records that both Noah and Abraham made burnt offerings (Genesis 8:20; 22:2, 13), a specific class of offering that represents a man's wholehearted devotion to God. In addition, Jacob made a drink offering on the pillar of stone that he raised (Genesis 35:14). From these examples, some sort of understood sacrificial system undoubtedly existed long before the specifics were recorded in Exodus—Deuteronomy.

A second possibility is that God did not instruct Adam and his family in exactly the same way as He did the Israelites but gave them enough to recognize the need for an animal sacrifice, whether in worshipping God or in symbolizing the future sacrifice of Christ to remit sin. From the examples prior to the Old Covenant, it is evident that they had some understanding of sacrifices, when they were to be made and what they symbolized. It is unlikely that men would have conceived the concept of offering animals or grain on their own, and even if they had, it is even more unlikely that God would have accepted any addition to the worship He specified. Such instruction must have come from God if He would accept it.

We may not know exactly why Abel made the offering he did or precisely what Cain knew to do but ignored. Yet, we can generally understand what was happening by remembering why God instituted sacrifices in Moses' time: They were added to the Old Covenant to remind the people of their sins—of falling short of God's glory (Galatians 3:19; Jeremiah 7:22-24). Whatever the exact infraction, something about Cain's sacrifice fell short of bringing to mind his sin and his need for a Savior. Something in his sacrifice failed to point to the Son of God's work of redemption.

David C. Grabbe
Cain's Assumption (Part One)

Genesis 15:10

Genesis 15:10 and 17 show us a small portion of the ancient practice of making serious covenants. Those making the covenant prepared a sacrifice by dividing animals or fowl in two, then both parties passed between the divided carcasses. This symbolized the seriousness of their intentions in that the divided carcasses represented what would happen to them if they did not keep their oath! They placed their lives at risk. The carcasses were then burned, symbolizing their acceptance.

The smoking oven and burning torch symbolize God. In many instances in the Bible, God represents Himself through the image of fire (i.e., the burning bush and the pillar of fire). The sacrifice in Genesis 15 is interesting in that only God passes between the divided carcasses because, in reality, this is an oath of only one party, God, to keep His promise. In this specific case, Abraham has agreed to nothing, but God has bound Himself with utmost seriousness to meet the requirements of His promise in full. This promise will be fulfilled only because of God's character and grace.

The 14th thus signifies the ratification of the promise by sacrifice, and the 15th, what it accomplishes by providing visible evidence of God's faithfulness (e.g., the Israelites go free).

John W. Ritenbaugh
Countdown to Pentecost 2001

Leviticus 1:1-4

This is commonly called the burnt offering, but sometimes the whole burnt offering. The reason "whole" is added is because other offerings are burned on the altar but not the whole animal. This offering represents Christ, or in parallel, us, being completely, wholeheartedly devoted to God.

John W. Ritenbaugh
The Offerings of Leviticus (Part Two): The Burnt Offering

Leviticus 1:1-17

Leviticus 1 gives instruction on the whole burnt offering, which represents Christ's total devotion to God, revealing in broad strokes the ideal we are to strive for in our relationship with God. The burnt offering has four distinctive characteristics that set it apart from all others. To glean the most from it, it is essential that we remember that these characteristics all describe the same person but from different perspectives, much as the gospel accounts present four views of Christ, or as one would turn a piece of art or craftsmanship to inspect it from different angles. With each little turn, the viewer picks up a new feature that pleases or instructs.

The four distinctive characteristics are:

1. It is a sweet savor to God, given not because of sin but out of sincere and heartfelt devotion.

2. It is offered for acceptance in the stead of the offerer. The animal represents the offerer.

3. A life is given, representing total devotion in every area of life.

4. It is completely burned up, also representing total devotion but from a different angle: that it was truly carried out.

The animal was cut into four distinct parts, each signifying an aspect of Christ's character and life: The head represents His thoughts; the legs, His walk; the innards, His feelings; and the fat, His general vigor and health. Every part was put on the altar and totally consumed by the fire.

The variety of animals sacrificed as burnt offerings identify additional characteristics: The bullock typifies untiring labor in service to others; the lamb, uncomplaining submission even in suffering; the goat, strong-minded leadership; and the turtledove, humility, meekness, and mournful innocence.

John W. Ritenbaugh
The Offerings of Leviticus (Part Three): The Meal Offering

Leviticus 1:2-3

The imagery of the bullock is of patient, untiring, and successful labor in service to others. Proverbs 14:4 confirms this, "Where no oxen are, the trough is clean; but much increase comes by the strength of an ox." History shows that oxen will literally work themselves to death. Likewise, we have seen Jesus' devotion to the death in fulfilling God's will for Him, and II Corinthians 11 provides a long list of Paul's labors under frequent duress in fulfilling his calling.

John W. Ritenbaugh
The Offerings of Leviticus (Part Two): The Burnt Offering

Leviticus 1:5-17

A comparison of the operations of the offerer and the priest on the offerings reveals distinctions in the varieties of the burnt offering. In Leviticus 1:5-17, we see that the bullock, sheep, and goat were cut up and washed with water, but the turtledove was not. It was split but not cut into pieces. This focuses mostly on the work of priest who assists in the offering because, even for those who would be quite capable of performing this function, the priest is still required to do it for them.

John W. Ritenbaugh
The Offerings of Leviticus (Part Two): The Burnt Offering

Leviticus 1:9

During the preparations for the burning, the entrails and legs—representing our innermost being: the heart from which conduct springs; the viscera, our emotions; and the legs, our walk—must be cleansed with water before all is burned on the fire. The burnt offering is cleaned on the inside and then completely consumed.

Here is pictured the standard of devotion to God; this is what God is aiming His children toward due to our access to Him through Christ. We are to be a cleansed, total sacrifice. We are to withhold nothing; we are to give our all. This is the hardest of all the offerings God calls upon us to perform because, like the rich young ruler, we want to reserve things for ourselves. Whatever it is, it is like a child's security blanket, and we love it and do not want to let it go.

David understood sacrificing, which II Samuel 24:24 reveals:

Then the king said to Araunah. "No, but I will surely buy it from you for a price; nor will I offer burnt offerings to the LORD my God with that which costs me nothing." So David bought the threshing floor and the oxen for fifty shekels of silver.

The burnt offering is painful because it is costly. It is so costly because it costs us our life. This is what we give in exchange for the forgiveness of our sins! Jesus Himself says this in Luke 14:26: "If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple."

Hebrews 5:7-8 informs us that Jesus Christ felt His sacrifices—not just His sacrifice on the stake, but also the multitude of sacrifices He made after emptying Himself of His godly prerogatives to live as a burnt offering for 33½ years.

John W. Ritenbaugh
The Offerings of Leviticus (Part Nine): Conclusion (Part Two)

Leviticus 2:2

Nearly forty times in the Old Testament, God declares how pleasing the aroma of a burnt offering is. This positive imagery of scent represents God's satisfaction in experiencing the proper worship of Him. In the meal offering, frankincense contributes to His satisfaction because it always accompanies the burnt offering.

Frankincense has a sweet fragrance, and honey a sweet taste, but the effect of heat—representing the pressure of trials—on them is vastly different. Heat corrupts, breaks down, and eventually destroys honey. This characteristic is probably why God did not permit its use in the sacrifices (Leviticus 2:11). However, frankincense does not release its greatest fragrance until heat is applied.

Incense has a long history of use in offerings to God. The priests used it daily on the incense altar, which stood directly in front of the curtain that separated the Holy Place from the Holies of Holies where the Ark of the Covenant, representing God's throne, stood. The incense billowed up in a smoky cloud, filling the rooms with a fragrant odor. On the Day of Atonement, the High Priest burned incense in the Holy of Holies itself before the Ark.

Isaiah 6:1, 4 describes the vision Isaiah saw of God's heavenly dwelling place:

In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, high and lifted up, and the train of His robe filled the temple. . . . And the posts of the door were shaken by the voice of him who cried out, and the house was filled with smoke.

The imagery of the smoke of incense and its fragrance, representing the prayers of the saints is well known. For instance, Psalm 141:2 says, "Let my prayer be set before You as incense, the lifting up of my hands as the evening sacrifice." Revelation 5:8 confirms this: "Now when He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints."

However, in the context of the meal offering, incense carries additional significance because of its overall meaning of dedication in service to man. Notice Jesus' words in Matthew 13:20-21:

But he who received the seed on stony places, this is he who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy; yet he has no root in himself, but endures only for a while. For when tribulation of persecution arises because of the word, immediately he stumbles.

Incense portrays a person's attitude during his trials endured in service to fellow man. A person might be all sweetness and light until the hardship of service hits him, and he grows bitter and turns aside.

Frequently, a Christian's trials involve people, often those close to him: relatives, business coworkers, or social acquaintances. Nothing is more consistently difficult than interpersonal relationships. Paul writes in Philippians 2:14-15, "Do all things without murmuring and disputing, that you may become blameless and harmless, children of God without fault in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world." He tells the Corinthians, ". . . nor murmur, as some of them also murmured, and were destroyed by the destroyer" (I Corinthians 10:10). Finally, Peter advises, "Be hospitable to one another without grumbling" (I Peter 4:9). Frankincense represents the pleasant satisfaction God experiences when His children endure without grumbling the hardships of unstinting service, especially to their brethren.

John W. Ritenbaugh
The Offerings of Leviticus (Part Three): The Meal Offering

Leviticus 3:1-5

Biblical commentators have given this offering a variety of titles. "Peace," "fellowship," "praise," and "thanksgiving" are the most common. However, the Keil-Delitzsch Commentary states that the most correct is "saving offering" (vol. 1, p. 298). Each title shows a somewhat different aspect of the teaching contained in it. Verse 5 informs us that this too is a sweet-savor offering, indicating that no sin is involved in it, and thus it is most satisfying to God. The word "satisfying" is important to understanding this offering.

Verse 5 also shows us an aspect of the ritual that teaches us about this offering's purpose. It is burnt upon, that is, on top of, the burnt sacrifice, which in turn had the meal offering on top of it. They were not necessarily layered like a sandwich and then all burned at the same time. However, the daily burnt offering was always made first, and it was followed by the meal offering and the peace offering on the same fire (Keil-Delitzsch, vol. 1, p. 300).

The peace offering, then, had to be offered after the other two were already burning. How long after is lost to history, but it could not have been a long time if the same fire was used.

John W. Ritenbaugh
The Offerings of Leviticus (Part Four): The Peace Offering

Leviticus 4:20

Clearly, in the sin offering described here, atonement is used in the sense of "a covering," and therefore as a means of forgiving sin. By contrast, in the burnt offering sin is nowhere seen because it is not part of what the burnt offering teaches. In it, God is satisfied because the offerer has met His requirement through his life, by the righteous way he lives his life. Thus, the offering shows the offerer accepted.

However, not all sense of covering is lost in the use of "atonement" in Leviticus 1. Here, the essence of covering arises in the fact that the offering covers—is fitting or appropriate—in the sense of meeting all conditions. The conditions involve a life of sincere, wholehearted, and loyal devotion to God.

John W. Ritenbaugh
The Offerings of Leviticus (Part Two): The Burnt Offering

Leviticus 16:5

Each year on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur), the high priest performed an elaborate ceremony consisting of four sacrificial animals (see Leviticus 16). He offered a ram as a burnt offering, a bullock as a sin offering for the high priest and his household, and two goats together as a sin offering. These two goats receive the most attention on this day. A vital detail in this ceremony is that the two goats together accomplish atonement for the nation.

Notice Leviticus 16:5: "And he shall take from the congregation of the children of Israel two kids of the goats as a [singular] sin offering" (emphasis ours throughout). This instruction is unusual, for the ordinary sin offering consisted of a single animal (see Leviticus 4:3, 14, 23, 28; 5:6-7). Why did God command two animals as the sin offering for the nation?

To answer this question, we must first examine the typical sin offering, outlined in Leviticus 4. There, God commands four slightly different rituals, depending on who had committed the unintentional sin: a priest (verses 3-12), the whole congregation (verses 13-21), a leader of the people (verses 22-26), or an individual (verses 27-31).

Regardless of the transgressor, though, the priest conducted the same basic procedure—one to take note of, for it helps to explain the Day of Atonement ceremony. In the standard sin offering, the guilty party first laid his hands on the sacrificial animal (Leviticus 4:4, 15, 24, 29). This action symbolized the innocent animal taking the place of the sinner, figuratively transferring the guilt of the person to the animal. Second, the animal was killed. Third, the priest sprinkled some of its blood in front of the veil, and he put some on the horns of either the golden altar (used for incense) or the brazen altar (used for burnt offerings), depending on who sinned. He poured the rest of the blood at the base of the brazen altar. Finally, select parts of the animal were burned on the brazen altar, while the rest of the animal was burned outside the camp.

The procedure for the sin offering essentially ends there, but more needs to be considered. The offering has symbolically cleansed the guilty party, but is the sin truly gone? In this regard, the book of Hebrews teaches us that 1) animal blood is used for symbolic cleansing and purification (Hebrews 9:13, 22); but 2) the blood of bulls and goats cannot take away sins (Hebrews 10:4). In the ritual of the sin offering, then, the transgressor is symbolically cleansed, yet his sin is not taken away—it cannot be removed simply through the shedding of animal blood.

To further understand the symbolism of blood and sin, remember that God repeatedly prohibits the eating of blood (Genesis 9:4; Leviticus 7:26-27; 17:10-14; 19:26; Deuteronomy 12:16). Even though the animal to be eaten is dead, God still considers the blood of the animal to contain the life of the animal! Deuteronomy 12:23 proclaims, "Only be sure that you do not eat the blood, for the blood is the life; you may not eat the life with the [lifeless] meat." Blood is a symbol of life, even after the heart has stopped! It is a representation—even a record—of the life lived. Thus, the first usage of blood in Scripture is anthropomorphic: God considered Abel's blood to have a voice even after Cain had cut his life short by violence (Genesis 4:10).

If the blood of an unblemished animal represents an innocent life, the blood of an animal upon whose head sins have been transferred represents a sinful life. Therefore, while the transgressor is symbolically cleansed of his sins after laying his hands on an innocent animal and shedding its blood, the substituted blood still bore witness—a record—of the transgression. In some scenarios, priests could eat the meat of a sin offering, but because of the symbolic defilement of the blood, if any of its blood got on the priests' garments, they had to be washed (Leviticus 6:27). There is no such proscription for the blood of burnt offerings or peace offerings, in which blood is shed yet which do not involve sin.

Because of this symbolic, sin-carrying quality of blood, it is as if the horns of the golden or incense altar—covered with the blood of countless substitutionary animals—became a repository for all the nation's sins, sins that still had to be taken away (compare Jeremiah 17:1). This is shown by God's command that the incense altar—specifically the horns, where the defiled blood was placed—had to be cleansed once a year:

And Aaron shall make atonement upon [the altar's] horns once a year with the blood of the sin offering of atonement; once a year he shall make atonement upon it throughout your generations. It is most holy to the LORD." (Exodus 30:10)

The incense altar was symbolically cleansed once a year through the high priest "mak[ing] atonement" upon it, meaning he would cover it with blood that did not represent sin. This verse gives the essence of what was to happen on the Day of Atonement, while Leviticus 16 provides all the specifics of how God's instructions were to be carried out.

David C. Grabbe
Why Two Goats on Atonement? (Part One)

Numbers 18:8-11

Sons and daughters indicate the family of the priest. It surely included his wife as well, but this was all God needed to say to make His intention clear. Spiritually, the altar represents God's table, and the sons and daughters are the brethren in the church, the Family of our High Priest. Since we are eating from God's table, this shows us in communion with God. It also shows us doing or having a portion in the work of the priest and as having a claim on the sacrifice.

All who have communion or fellowship with God must share that communion with His priests and His children, the rest of the church, our brothers and sisters. If one brings an offering, he shares in it. There is an interesting example of this in Acts 2:41-42, beginning on the Day of Pentecost and continuing for an unknown time thereafter: "Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them. And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers." The sharing with brothers and sisters is plainly expressed in the words "fellowship," "breaking of bread," and "prayers."

Verses 43-45 add, "Then fear came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles. Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common, and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need." It almost seems as if the godly fear, wonders, and signs sprang directly from the sharing spirit and the sacrifices made by those who gave.

Can we feast with God and ignore His other guests? A person in communion with God must be in communion with all who are in communion with Him. Do we see the oneness this implies? We are all eating of the same sacrifice, the same meal. We are all being fed and strengthened by the same Spirit, and God expects that we share what we have with our brothers and sisters.

This era of the church has never experienced anything similar to the first era, but before the end time is over, we may. In the meanwhile, we should open our homes in hospitality, sharing our experiences in life with one another. We should be praying with and for each other to assist in drawing us together in unity.

Christ is our supreme example in all things pertaining to life. What did Christ do to bring us into oneness with the Father? Whatever He did we must, in principle, also do as burnt and meal offerings, keeping the commands of God with all our heart in complete devotion. In His final teaching before His crucifixion, He sets a very high standard: "This is My commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you" (John 15:12). As means "equal to."

He also says in verse 13, "Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one's life for his friends." Jesus laid down His life step by step and then concluded it by submitting to crucifixion for our well-being. Those sacrifices produce peace and unity with God for those who accept His sacrifice and submit to the burden of bearing one's responsibilities before God.

The conclusion is inescapable: The peace that God gives is directly linked to sacrifice and love. Our Father began the process by so loving the world that He sacrificed His only begotten Son for its sins. The Son followed the Father by magnanimously allowing Himself to be crucified in sublime submission to the Father's will. He did this after laying down His life for mankind, day by day, as a living sacrifice.

All of this begins the process for us so that we can have peace with God and that His Spirit can shed His love abroad in our hearts. The process of producing peace, harmony, and unity is thus also directly linked as a result of our sacrifices in devoted obedience to His commands.

The burnt, meal, and peace offerings are meaningful illustrations of what is necessary within our relationships to produce peaceful and edifying fellowship that truly honors and glorifies God.

John W. Ritenbaugh
The Offerings of Leviticus (Part Five): The Peace Offering, Sacrifice, and Love

Numbers 29:6

Notice that the word "its" appears twice, conveying that the meal offering belonged to the burnt offering. This demonstrates that the two offerings were offered together. Though the burnt offering may appear to be the "greater" of the two, one is incomplete without the other, even as the two great commandments go together. In each case, the one shows man doing his duty to God, the other, his duty to man.

I John 4:20-21 confirms this:

If someone says, "I love God," and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen? And this commandment we have from Him: that he who loves God must love his brother also.

The two must go together. The one without the other is not acceptable to God.

John W. Ritenbaugh
The Offerings of Leviticus (Part Three): The Meal Offering

Deuteronomy 27:1-8

What God says is perplexing for at least three reasons:

1. Why did God command the building of the altar on Ebal, the mountain of cursing?

2. Why were the stones on which the law was written to go on Ebal and not on the mountain of blessing, Mount Gerizim?

3. Why did God limit the type of sacrifices to be offered on that altar to burnt and peace (fellowship) sacrifices? Why no sin offerings? After all, in the symbology, Mount Ebal is related to disobedience, the cause of the curse. Symbolically, Ebal relates to rebellion and sin, but no sin offering was to be offered there.

In considering the puzzle, notice Matthew 25:12, where Christ tells the five unwise virgins, “I do not know you.” They were running out of oil—short of God's Holy Spirit. In I Corinthians 2:14, Paul avers that individuals lacking God's Spirit are unable “to see spiritual things” (The New Testament in Modern English, Revised Edition). The devout among such individuals may be able to keep the law (to a degree, at least) in its letter, that is, the law written on stones, but not in its deeper intent, not in its spirit, written as it is on hearts, as God puts it in Jeremiah 31:33.

Symbolically, those on Mount Ebal are cousins to the unwise virgins, lacking the oil necessary to get them to the marriage feast, as Christ says in Matthew 25:10. Unable to discern spiritual things, they have access only to the law written on stones. In His providence, God supplied those laws to them, there on Ebal.

On the other hand, those standing on Mount Gerizim represent those who have God's laws written on their hearts. There are no stones on Gerizim. There does not need to be.

Reflect on this, too: The people on Gerizim represent those in God's church who are fully at peace with God, enjoying fellowship with Him. For them, there is no need for a further peace offering. They need not offer peace offerings on an altar.

Also, Christ's comment in Luke 14:33 pertains to them: “[A]ny one of you who does not renounce all that he has cannot be My disciple.” Those on Gerizim symbolize those who are Christ's disciples, truly repentant and fully committed to God, living sacrifices in His service. They have held back nothing. The burnt offering represents such a life, one lived in total dedication to God. Those on Gerizim need not offer burnt offerings anew. They do not need a stone altar, for they have already committed their lives to God.

Consequently, there is no more need that an altar be built on Mount Gerizim than there is for plastered stones inscribed with God's laws to be there. Both stones and altar are superfluous to those on Gerizim. Conversely, those standing on Mount Ebal, not at peace with God, not committed fully to His service, need an altar. That is why God provided one for them—if they will make use of it.

Charles Whitaker
Unity and Division: The Blessing and the Curse (Part Three)

Joshua 5:10-11

Joshua 5:10-11 cannot be used to justify changing from the normal Pentecost counting pattern used when Passover falls on a Monday, Wednesday, or Friday.

Some, realizing their argument for always keeping Wavesheaf Day within the Days of Unleavened Bread is still quite weak, have leapt on another rationalization and conclusion from a series of assumptions read into Joshua 5:10-11. These assumptions have led them to the conclusion that, since Leviticus 23:14 states that the Israelites were not to eat bread nor parched grain nor fresh grain from their new spring harvest until they had brought their sheaf offering to God, and since Joshua 5:11 records that the Israelites ate of the produce of the land on the day after Passover, it means they must have made a wavesheaf offering.

However, major assumptions in their argument have led them to a wrong conclusion:

First Assumption: Joshua and the Israelites waved the sheaf following a harvest of Canaanite grain. This must be read into the context because this is nowhere stated. In fact, neither the words "wave," "waved," "waves" nor "wavesheaf" or "wave offering" appear in the entire book of Joshua. In addition, the context makes no mention of the burnt or meal offerings that were to accompany the waving of the sheaf (Leviticus 23:12-13). Finally, it does not mention the erection of an altar. This is no minor element because it would have been the first altar established after entering the Promised Land.

Second Assumption: This was a year Passover fell on a Sabbath. How do they know that? No one knows it! Nobody knows with absolute certainty what year Israel entered into the Promised Land, let alone the exact day this offering was supposedly made! They have no calendar date from which to offer proof. The argument is built on a series of "ifs" centered on the assumption that the Israelites were required to wave the sheaf before they could eat of the harvest of the land.

Third Assumption: Israel was required by God—forced by law—to make the wavesheaf offering before they could eat the grain from a Canaanite planting. This assumption is drawn from Leviticus 23:10, 14. Taken alone, these scriptures may lead one to think the wavesheaf had to be done immediately. However, where does God say that it had to be done immediately or that they could not eat of the produce of the land upon entering it? He says nothing of the sort as they approached the land. We will see that the Israelites not only did not have to make a wavesheaf offering of Canaanite grain before eating of the land's produce, but that they did not do so, and further, doing so would have been sin to them.

Fourth Assumption: God would accept an Israelite offering derived from crops they had not planted on their own land. Exodus 23:14-16 explicitly states that their offerings had to come from grain that the Israelites themselves had sown in the field. Any grains they would have harvested after entering the land would have come from what the Canaanites had sown. This makes all the difference in the world when we consider the spiritual significance of sowing and harvesting. Does God's Spirit produce the heathen—the unconverted—person's spiritual harvest?

II Samuel 24:24 shows that David clearly understood another principle involved here. The one making the offering must have done the labor and made the sacrifices necessary to produce the offering and render it acceptable to God. Offerings that cost the offerer nothing are not acceptable.

Where are the labor and sacrifice involved in Israel's supposed wavesheaf offering? Offering from Canaan's harvest was not acceptable for Israel to give because it cost them nothing. In short, God wants offered to Him what He has first given to us. When God loves us and we then return love to Him, it is acceptable because He first loved us (I John 4:19) and shed His Spirit abroad in our hearts (Romans 5:5). When we offer love to Him, it is His own love, providence, the fruit of His Spirit that we have labored to produce, returning to Him.

Fifth Assumption: God would accept an offering of polluted things. The context in Leviticus 22:19-25 specifically covers animal offerings, but the principle applies to grain offerings as well, as the explanation of the fourth assumption indicates. No animals with blemishes of explicit nature are permitted to be the food of God. In verse 25, God says that nothing from the foreigner's hand is acceptable "because their corruption is in them." God states, "They shall not be accepted on your behalf."

If one thinks this is of small consequence, then perhaps it would be good to review what happened to Nadab and Abihu, Aaron's sons, when they foolishly used coals from a profane or common fire as they made the offering on the incense altar. God did not think it insignificant when they offered fire He considered unfit for His altar. He struck them dead as a lesson to all those who are less concerned about purity of worship than they should be.

Israel was symbolically under the blood of Jesus Christ and had made the covenant with God. This rendered them a holy people consecrated for God's use and glorification. Because they were chosen by God and holy, their offerings, as long as they were without blemish and not from the stranger's hand, were acceptable to Him.

Israel had no acceptable harvest to offer in Joshua 5. In fact, under the circumstance, Israel was required by law not to make an offering!

Sixth Assumption: Israel was permitted to make an offering of any kind. This is a big one, reinforcing all the other objections against the common interpretation that Joshua 5:10-11 permits or demands a First Day of Unleavened Bread waving of the sheaf and beginning of the count.

In reality, upon entering the land, offerings involved in the worship of God were specifically forbidden by Him until certain things were first accomplished. Through Moses, God instructs in Deuteronomy 12:1, 5-14:

These are the statutes and judgments which you shall be careful to observe in the land which the Lord God of your fathers is giving you to possess, all the days that you live on the earth. . . . [Y]ou shall seek the place where the Lord your God chooses, out of all your tribes, to put His name for His habitation; and there you shall go. There you shall take your burnt offerings, your sacrifices, your tithes, the heave offerings of your hand, your vowed offerings, your freewill offerings, and the firstlings of your herds and flocks. And there you shall eat before the Lord your God, and you shall rejoice in all to which you have put your hand, you and your households, in which the Lord your God has blessed you. You shall not at all do as we are doing here today—every man doing whatever is right in his own eyes—for as yet you have not come to the rest and the inheritance which the Lord your God is giving you. But when you cross over the Jordan and dwell in the land which the Lord your God is giving you to inherit, and when He gives you rest from all your enemies round about, so that you dwell in safety, then there will be the place where the Lord your God chooses to make His name abide. There you shall bring all that I command you: your burnt offerings, your sacrifices, your tithes, the heave offerings of your hand, and all your choice offerings which you vow to the Lord. And you shall rejoice before the Lord your God, you and your sons and your daughters, your menservants and maidservants, and the Levite who is within your gates, since he has no portion nor inheritance with you. Take heed to yourself that you do not offer your burnt offerings in every place that you see; but in the place which the Lord chooses, in one of your tribes, there you shall offer your burnt offerings, and there you shall do all that I command you. (emphasis added)

This instruction supersedes Leviticus 23 and Numbers 28-29—and especially for the purposes of this article, Leviticus 23:10, 14, where God commands, "When you come into the land. . . ." From those two verses, one could easily assume that the Israelites were to begin keeping those days and all their offerings immediately upon entering. However, Deuteronomy 12, written within the last month before entering the Promised Land, puts a hold on doing these things immediately upon entering the land (Deuteronomy 1:3). Deuteronomy 12 makes clear that they were not free to follow the Leviticus 23 instructions until certain matters were accomplished.

Deuteronomy 12 paves the way for Israel, at God's command, to establish a headquarters, a national, central place for the worship of the Lord God at the site of His choosing. Further, God adds that they were actually to be dwelling in the land, to be at rest, and to be dwelling in safety from their enemies. Also included within these instructions, though not specifically mentioned, is that the Tabernacle, the altar, the laver, and all the interior furniture had to be erected and in place.

Please pay special attention to what Moses says while the Israelites are still in the wilderness: "You shall not at all do as we are doing here today" (verse 8), referring to making offerings any old place that was convenient. In addition, Israel actually had to be living in the land, not marching around it fighting wars. They had to be in a settled circumstance—so settled that they were in safety. Obviously, this eliminates a wavesheaf offering and its accompanying burnt and meal offerings from happening in Joshua 5.

The place God ultimately chose and in which Israel erected the Tabernacle was Shiloh. This was not accomplished until Joshua 18:1: "Then the whole congregation of the children of Israel assembled together at Shiloh, and set up the tabernacle of meeting there. And the land was subdued before them." This was the first sign that things were almost ready so they could legitimately offer sacrifices to God. However, some land had yet to be apportioned. The land for seven tribes plus the allocation of cities to the Levites and the cities of refuge had yet to be settled. The final apportioning is recorded in chapters 18-21. Thus, many of the tribes were not yet dwelling and at rest at the beginning of Joshua 18.

The official announcement that all was in place appears in Joshua 21:43-45:

So the Lord gave to Israel all the land of which He had sworn to give to their fathers, and they took possession of it and dwelt in it. The Lord gave them rest all around, according to all that He had sworn to their fathers. And not a man of all their enemies stood against them; the Lord delivered all their enemies into their hand. Not a word failed of any good thing which the Lord had spoken to the house of Israel. All came to pass.

From the time they crossed the Jordan and entered the land, seven years passed before they were free to offer what Deuteronomy 12 forbade and what some claim occurred in Joshua 5.

Seventh Assumption: Joshua and the Israelites were so irresponsible as to disregard God's clear instruction given through Moses while they were still wandering. Does the Scripture anywhere speak badly of Joshua? In Joshua 1:6-9, God specifically seeks out Joshua to exhort him to be courageous, not turning to the right or left regarding what he had been instructed as Moses' right-hand man. That Joshua did just this is verified in Joshua 11:15: "As the Lord had commanded Moses His servant, so Moses commanded Joshua, and so Joshua did. He left nothing undone of all that the Lord had commanded Moses." At the end of his life, he is as firm as ever (Joshua 23-24).

Joshua 22:25-30 provides a telling example of how deeply the command not to make any sacrifices except where God had placed His name was burned into all of Israel's heart at that time. When it was found that Reuben, Gad, and half of the tribe of Manasseh, which had settled on the east side of Jordan, had erected what appeared to be a sacrificial altar, the remaining tribes almost entered into civil war to stop them! A fuller explanation revealed they had erected, not an altar, but a monument dedicated as evidence of the East Bank tribes' unity with God and the other tribes of Israel on the west side. They were not about to make offerings anywhere except where God commanded.

The Israelites did not make the wavesheaf offering when they came into the land.

John W. Ritenbaugh
Pentecost, Consistency, and Honesty

Joshua 5:10-11

Joshua 5:10-11 cannot be used to support using the First Day of Unleavened Bread to begin the count to Pentecost because:

1. No authority is given in Scripture to change the method of counting to Pentecost when Passover falls on the weekly Sabbath.

2. Counting to Pentecost always begins the day after the weekly Sabbath within the Days of Unleavened Bread. It is the weekly Sabbath, God's sign, not Wavesheaf Day that must fall within the Days of Unleavened Bread.

3. Exodus 23 explicitly requires the grain offering to be planted by the offerer, thus they had none to offer immediately after entering the land.

4. Leviticus 22 forbids making an offering of heathen substance, thus they had no acceptable grain offering.

5. Deuteronomy 12 forbids offerings until the Tabernacle, altar, laver, and all the Tabernacle's furniture were in place.

6. Deuteronomy 12 requires the Israelites to be settled in their inheritances and no longer involved in warfare before any sacrifices could be lawfully made.

John W. Ritenbaugh
Pentecost, Consistency, and Honesty

Psalm 141:2

David says that sacrifice is a prayer. It also works the other way around: Prayer is a sacrifice. Why? Because it is a gift of devotion, praise, and thanksgiving that aids in changing a person's nature from his self-centeredness.

Why is prayer a sacrifice? First, it consumes time. We dislike giving time up unless our heart is consumed by what we want to do, and human nature does not want to do spiritual things. Second, prayer requires giving—the giving of one's mind over to thinking about the qualities of God. How else can we thank Him? We give ourselves to the activity of praise—praise for things that He has done. We do that because we have thought about them and because we acknowledge His presence, His activity, in our or somebody else's life.

Prayer is most effective when we act as a mediator, interceding on behalf of others, meaning that we have given our time to thinking about them and their needs. We give our time to go to God and ask for His intervention so to help them change. God acts on our behalf because we sacrificed and begins to change us away from our egocentricity, our self-centeredness. God is training our minds to think about others rather than the self.

In Psalm 40:6-8, the psalmist says that God did not want burnt offerings. Those who were converted under the Old Covenant understood this fact. Paul quotes this passage in the book of Hebrews. In fact, he quotes Jesus Christ as saying it before He ever came to the earth: "Sacrifice and offering You did not want, You did not desire; otherwise, I would have given it to You. But a body you have prepared for me" (Hebrews 10:5).

One can easily make a ritual out of going to services, tithing, getting rid of the leaven, fasting on the Day of Atonement, or even going to the Feast of Tabernacles if our reasons for doing so are perfunctory, we do not understand, or we disagree with the object lesson that God intends we learn from doing them.

When that lawyer asked Jesus in Matthew 22, which is the great commandment of the law, Jesus said, "You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind; and the second is like it." He quoted Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18.

What Jesus described is the meaning of a whole burnt offering. The burnt offering of Leviticus 1:1-13 is the offering of an animal, but it pictures the offering of a life lived completely consumed in obedience to living God's way. Nothing will prepare us for the Kingdom of God to be both kings and priests like following, with all of our being, Leviticus 1:1-13 and what that burnt offering means. Jesus did. He lived as a whole burnt offering to God.

John W. Ritenbaugh
Preparing to Be a Priest

Amos 5:21-24

Israel's religion was going nowhere. The people were not righteous, moral, or just in their dealings with one another, so their playing at religion, though sincere, was despicable to God.

In the list of sacrifices in verse 22, the sin offering is not mentioned, suggesting that the Israelites felt they had done no sin that required forgiveness. This shows that they were not in contact with God; they had no relationship with Him. If they had, they would have been aware where they had fallen short, and they could have repented.

Amos includes three other offerings that the Israelites gave but God would not accept. Knowing what they represent gives us insight into how the people were falling short in their spiritual lives.

The burnt offering teaches total devotion to the Creator. It was completely burned up on the altar, typifying the offerer being completely devoted in service to God. This offering corresponds to the first four commandments, which show love and devotion toward God.

Similarly, the grain offering, also called the cereal offering, meal offering, or meat offering, teaches total dedication and service to man. It was offered in conjunction with the burnt offering. The grain offering typifies the last six commandments, which regulate our relationships and love toward our fellow man.

The peace offering represents one's fellowship upward to God and outward to man. It was primarily given in thanks for God's blessing. When this offering was made, God, the priest, the offerer, and his family and friends shared in a common meal and fellowship, as all these parties ate part of the sacrificed animal.

But from God's reaction to their offerings, it is clear that the people of ancient Israel were not devoted to God or to their fellow man. Nor were they in true fellowship with either God or man, and therefore they could not see their sins. They did not see the holiness of God and compare themselves to it. If they had, they would have seen that they needed to make changes in their lives, but in judging themselves solely against other men—an unwise thing to do (II Corinthians 10:12)—they felt no need for repentance.

They did not understand what God really wanted of them. They may have appeased their own consciences with their church attendance, hymn singing, and sacrifices, but they went home and continued to oppress and cheat and lie. True religion is

1) A relationship with God (Matthew 22:37). Without a relationship with Him, we cannot know Him or understand His purpose for us.

2) Submission and obedience to God as our part of the relationship (James 4:7-8). In offering to make the covenant with the children of Israel (Exodus 20-24), He proposed to them. They accepted their obligation—to obey Him—but they were unfaithful in fulfilling it. As the Israel of God (Galatians 6:16) and the future Bride of Christ (Revelation 19:7-9), the church must not fail as ancient Israel did.

3) Real love for God's truth (II Thessalonians 2:10). Israel neither loved nor sought God's truth.

4) Moral integrity (I Peter 3:8-12). Living in righteousness and holiness shows love toward God and man.

5) Social responsibility (James 1:27). Israel, as a nation of this world, had a responsibility to ensure that their care of their fellow Israelites was acceptable in God's eyes. The church, a spiritual organism, is not of this world, and as a body, has no responsibility at this time to change society—only ourselves. We must take care of our brethren within the church now, and we will have our chance to help this world in God's Kingdom.

These five points will not "buy" us into the presence of God, but rather they are five proofs that we follow true religion. Remember Jacob's dream. God chooses us and meets us at the foot of the ladder, making a difference in our lives. He gives us a way of life to follow, and we pledge to follow it. Thus, true religion is not a way to God but a way of living from God.

John W. Ritenbaugh
Prepare to Meet Your God! (The Book of Amos) (Part Two)

Zephaniah 1:8

Zephaniah makes no bones about the fact that his prophecy deals with the Day of the Lord and His anger at humanity for its hostility to Him: "'I will utterly consume everything from the face of the land,' says the Lord" (Zephaniah 1:2). It is clear that He is most disappointed with His chosen people, who should have known better because He had worked with them for many generations (Amos 3:1-2). Yet, even they had become idolaters, worshipping Baal and Milcom and "the whole host of heaven," turning away from God and no longer seeking Him (Zephaniah 1:4-6).

In verse 7, God calls for silence; He wants no more protests or excuses. He has decided to prepare a sacrifice and invited guests to partake of it. The modern Westerner has little notion of what this entails. Under the Levitical system, not all sacrifices were completely consumed in the altar's fire. Some burnt sacrifices, as they were called, were annihilated, but others were strictly divided: Certain parts went on the fire, another part was given to the priest to eat, and the remainder—the majority of the animal—returned to the offerer. Usually, with such a large amount of meat to consume in a short time, the offerer would call a feast for his family and close friends.

From this comes a major principle of the sacrificial system. The altar symbolized a table and the giving of an offering represented the sharing of a meal among God, the priest, and the offerer. The three were united in fellowship, solidifying and strengthening a relationship. For Christians, this three-way relationship exists among the Father, the Son (who is our High Priest), and the Christian. As the apostle Paul enjoins us in Romans 12:1, rather than giving our lives in death to Him, we are to be "living sacrifices," holy and acceptable to God, continuing the relationship in service to Him.

However, Zephaniah reveals that God has something different in mind for the Day of the Lord. For His sacrifice—or sacrificial meal—He has invited guests from afar, and the sacrifice of which they will partake is His people, Judah! In verse 8, He is particularly incensed against Judah's rulers, the corrupt descendants of David, who have led the nation further into sin. He expected the royal house to follow the examples of David and Josiah, but they had instead pursued carnal habits and political expediencies, bringing Judah to the brink of war, captivity, exile, and destruction.

As the verse closes, He highlights the particular failing of listening to foreign influence, seen in the wearing of "foreign apparel." It likely refers to a trend among the aristocrats of the time of wearing the clothing style of the foreign nation he supported in the power-struggle over the strategic land-bridge that was the Kingdom of Judah. (The conflict over that bit of territory is still ongoing today.) At the time, it was probably the distinctive styles of Egypt and Babylon, both of which were quite different from that of the Israelites. The verse suggests that the nation's leaders had stopped wearing Israelite-style clothing altogether—symbolizing their departure from God and what He had commanded (for instance, Numbers 15:38-40)—and by donning the clothing of these powerful, competing empires, they were pledging their loyalties to the nations rather than to God. It could also mean that these aristocrats were worshipping the idols of these nations.

Behind the NKJV's translation of "punish," the Hebrew literally reads that God will "visit" the royal sons of Judah, which, in its negative sense, is a common metaphor for coming in judgment. It should come as no surprise that, when Judah finally fell to the Babylonians, Zedekiah's sons were killed before the eyes of their father, just before he was blinded and taken off to Babylon (II Kings 25:2-7). In addition, many of the aristocrats were killed and their children were dragged off to Babylon as slaves, as was the case with Daniel and his three friends, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego (Daniel 1:1-4).

Judah's destruction in the early-sixth century BC is just a type of the Day of the Lord that will be visited upon the world just before the return of Jesus Christ. God will be just as jealous for the loyalty of His people, true Christians, at that time as He was 2,600 years ago. We need to be asking ourselves if we have allowed ourselves to be "clothed with foreign apparel."

Richard T. Ritenbaugh

Matthew 5:17-18

People go around saying that the law is done away, including "rituals." No, it is not! Jesus says here very plainly that these things are not done away. We must understand that, though we may not have to perform them physically, their principles (God's intent behind them) is still binding upon us. Many laws deal with physical cleanliness. These same laws, in their intent, have to do with spiritual cleanliness. Their intent is still binding upon us.

We no longer have to make sacrifices at a physical brazen altar. True! Under the New Covenant, we become the sacrifice! We are the burnt offering. We become a living sacrifice (Romans 12:1).

John W. Ritenbaugh
New Covenant Priesthood (Part Two)

Matthew 5:23-24

Though making a sacrifice or freewill offering always involves a cost, its physical value is only a token to represent that a price is being paid. While to be accepted, an offering must cost the offerer something, God is not truly interested in its monetary value.

However, He gives strict requirements regarding the unblemished quality of the gift or sacrifice (Leviticus 22:19; Deuteronomy 15:21; 17:1; Malachi 1:8, 14), as well as its source (Deuteronomy 23:18). A man could make an offering surpassing Solomon's in scope—22,000 bulls and 120,000 sheep (I Kings 8:62-64)—but if God's other requirements were not satisfied, it would signify nothing more than useless rivers of blood. The Bible shows that sacrifices and offerings miss the point entirely when not accompanied by faithfulness and obedience:

» Has the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed than the fat of rams. (I Samuel 15:22; emphasis ours throughout)

» To do righteousness and justice is more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice. (Proverbs 21:3)

» The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination; how much more when he brings it with wicked intent! (Proverbs 21:27)

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus expounds on the letter of His law and shows the spiritual intent, giving specific instructions to ensure the acceptability of any gifts we bring to Him. If we know a brother has a grievance or charge against us—right or wrong, valid or not—we are responsible for taking the first step toward reconciliation.

This requires courage, as it requires vulnerability and willingness to open ourselves to criticism. It requires first understanding our brother's perspective and carefully weighing the matter. It demands that we be prepared to be shown our failings and to accept responsibility for them. Even though reconciliation is not always immediately possible, our willingness to humble ourselves and make the effort is worth far more to God than any monetary token of devotion. Reconciliation cannot be forced, but when the timing and circumstances are right, He will give peace.

David C. Grabbe
An Acceptable Gift

Matthew 5:23-24

These verses take on additional weight when seen in the larger context. Matthew 5:23 begins with "therefore," meaning it is directly tied to what is written before it:

You have heard that it was said to those of old, "You shall not murder, and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment." But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, "Raca!" shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, "You fool!" shall be in danger of hell fire. (Matthew 5:21-22)

Jesus teaches that murder is a matter of the heart, even if it does not break out in destruction of physical life. Unrighteous anger puts us in danger of judgment. Regarding a brother with contempt—as being an empty, worthless fellow with shallow brains ("Raca")—is likewise a transgression of the spirit of the law. The word translated "fool" does not refer to one simply devoid of wisdom but rather to a rebel against God—an apostate from all good! To condemn someone in such a way is to murder him in our hearts, putting us in danger of the Lake of Fire (Matthew 7:2; Galatians 5:21; Revelation 21:8).

If we know that someone is angry with us, it can be difficult not to respond in kind and begin finding reasons to be angry with him. Reconciling helps us to guard our hearts against the spirit of murder. The instruction to reconcile with a brother before making an offering is actually a means of safeguarding the sixth commandment.

This has another aspect: Reconciling also helps our brother not break the sixth commandment! Whether he actually transgresses in the letter or the spirit is ultimately up to him, but it is an act of love—of sacrifice—to do what we can to keep him from stumbling on our account. Sure, we could brush off anger toward us as "his problem"—and in the end it is—but if we can reconcile, we may play a part in stopping a "murder" in its genesis. It is a way of truly being our "brother's keeper": by sacrificing our pride and self-image for the sake of peace toward us in his heart.

Human nature being what it is, the question sometimes arises as to who one's "brother" is, similar to the lawyer asking, "Who is my neighbor?" to justify himself (Luke 10:25-37). While the scope of one's brethren is much smaller than that of one's neighbors, Jesus defines our spiritual brethren fairly broadly: "For whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother and sister and mother" (Matthew 12:50; emphasis ours throughout). Thus, if the overall trajectory of a man's life is "do[ing] the will of [the] Father"—albeit imperfectly, as every brother will—we are on dangerous ground if we arbitrarily judge him as not being a brother, especially if we do it to avoid having to humble ourselves. Writing someone off may enable us to stay comfortable, but such a hasty judgment carries an outstanding risk.

Christ instructs us to attempt reconciliation before making an offering because our part of reconciliation requires taking on the same attitude and intent toward our brother that God requires of us when making an offering to Him. Notice the attributes that God values:

» For You do not desire sacrifice, or else I would give it; you do not delight in burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit, a broken and a contrite heart—these, O God, You will not despise. (Psalm 51:16-17)

» With what shall I come before the LORD, and bow myself before the High God? Shall I come before Him with burnt offerings, with calves a year old? Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams, ten thousand rivers of oil? Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? He has shown you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God? (Micah 6:6-8)

God is most interested in the heart behind the offering or gift, and what is in the heart will be seen in what we are willing to do for the sake of a brother.

David C. Grabbe
An Acceptable Gift

Matthew 22:36-40

The burnt offering represents the perfect fulfillment of the first great commandment, and the meal offering corresponds to the second.

John W. Ritenbaugh
The Offerings of Leviticus (Part Three): The Meal Offering

Hebrews 11:4

The story of Abel teaches us that the only way to reverse mankind's separation from God is through a substitutionary sacrifice, performed in faith.

If we speculate that God gave the first family the same basic instructions He later gave to Israel, the details of the sacrifices of Cain and Abel become significant. Abel's offering appears to have been either a sin offering or a burnt offering, for both of these sacrifices came from the flock and required that the fat be offered, which Abel did (Genesis 4:4). The burnt offering symbolized a man's wholehearted devotion to God, containing even an aspect of atonement within it (Leviticus 1:4). It had to come "from the herd or the flock" (Leviticus 1:2), something Abel, being a keeper of sheep, would have had the means to offer.

The meal offering represented a man's wholehearted devotion to his fellow man, but no symbolism of atonement appears within it. It consisted of ground flour, corresponding to Cain's offering "of the fruit of the ground"—some sort of grain.

The sacrificial requirements are significant here because the meal and burnt offerings were always offered together. These two offerings represent the first four commandments (burnt offering) and the last six commandments (meal offering), which clearly cannot be separated. What is more, the burnt offering had to be made before the meal offering could be made. We learn, then, that our relationship with God must be established before we can have truly successful relationships with others.

So, when we see Cain making a meal offering, the symbolism suggests that, first, he was doing it on the basis of his own merit and righteousness—by skipping any aspect of atonement for sin, essentially saying, "I don't need to be reconciled to God first." Second, he was also implying that he could have a good relationship with his fellow man (represented by the meal offering) without first having a right relationship with God (represented by the burnt offering). Thus, Cain represents religion and worship on a person's own terms, according to his own priorities, rather than according to God's instruction.

The first lesson from Hebrews 11 is that peace with God and access to Him must come through an acceptable substitution for our lives. Jesus Christ is the only acceptable substitution, and thus the only guarantee of our access to God, our peace with Him, and the grace (including forgiveness) that He gives.

While this is an elementary Christian concept, a present-day application makes this relevant to us. The New Testament is replete with warnings about false prophets and false teachers, in particular those men who seek a following after themselves. Such men will make "guarantees" about God's protection and favor, as if becoming associated with them instantly causes God to look more highly upon a person. God, however, does not work through a system of "salvation by association." Such men have set themselves up as gatekeepers, alleging that they hold the key to a good relationship with God. They insinuate that our access to God and favor with Him lies in following them—as if the Savior's sacrifice was insufficient.

If something other than the sacrifice of Jesus Christ is being used as the basis for our entrance before God, we are in the same position as Cain, with our offering rejected for trying to worship on our own terms. Ancient Israel and Judah were guilty of this when they idolized the Temple of the Lord instead of looking to the Lord of the Temple (Ezekiel 24:18-21; Jeremiah 7:4-12). God scattered Israel because of idolatry. He scattered His own people because His people forgot Him—because they were looking to something else (Jeremiah 18:15-17). We can be guilty of the same thing if we are trusting in a church, a human leader, or the reported accomplishments of an organization as the basis of our standing with God.

The lesson from Abel is that our access to God, and thus our peace with Him, is on the basis of Jesus Christ's sacrifice, not the works of any man's hands. Cain attempted to worship God on his own terms, and God rejected him. It is blasphemous for us to hold up anything other than the perfect sacrifice of Jesus Christ as our means of access to God and peace with Him. It is equally blasphemous for any man to declare or imply that he can guarantee God's protection, forgiveness, or favor. Moreover, acting as a gatekeeper or guardian of God's favor will greatly inhibit the witness of God that is made simply because the focus is on a man or an organization rather than God.

David C. Grabbe
First Things First (Part Two): The Right Sacrifice


Find more Bible verses about Burnt offering:
Burnt offering {Nave's}
 




The Berean: Daily Verse and Comment

The Berean: Daily Verse and Comment

Sign up for the Berean: Daily Verse and Comment, and have Biblical truth delivered to your inbox. This daily newsletter provides a starting point for personal study, and gives valuable insight into the verses that make up the Word of God. See what over 150,000 subscribers are already receiving each day.

Email Address:

   
Leave this field empty

We respect your privacy. Your email address will not be sold, distributed, rented, or in any way given out to a third party. We have nothing to sell. You may easily unsubscribe at any time.
 A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z
©Copyright 1992-2024 Church of the Great God.   Contact C.G.G. if you have questions or comments.
Share this on FacebookEmailPrinter version
Close
E-mail This Page