Home Topics Index Download
Transcript 029A — Some Questions Concerning Leviticus 10
HC: Good evening. Welcome to Open Forum.
CALLER: I was studying the Book of Leviticus, and there are a couple of problems I ran into.
First of all, we're told in Leviticus 10:16 that Moses was very angry with the two sons of Aaron, because' if I understand it right, they had eaten the sacrifice. And it says in verse 17 that they were to eat it to make atonement for the people before the Lord. And I'm wondering if that's the reason why Aaron and his sons were supposed to eat it. For instance, we're told, I think somewhere in Exodus, when the breastplate was being made, that they were supposed to bear these stones upon their shoulders.
HC: The Urim and the Thummin . . .
CALLER: To bear the sins of the people. I'm wondering if this is the same type of thing.
HC: Actually, first of all, the altar was a figure of Christ. And in order for us to be holy, we eat of Christ. He is the Bread of Life And when the priests ate of the altar, now they were commanded in verse 12, where Moses said to them, "Take the cereal offering that remains of the offerings by the fire to the Lord and eat it unleavened beside the altar, for it is most holy. You shall eat it in the holy place because it is your due and your sons' due from the offerings by fire unto the Lord, for so I am commanded."
And so, actually, by their eating this, this was a figure of the fact that they became holy by eating of this. To partake of the altar would make one holy. Now Eleazar and Ithamar apparently refused to do this. In other words, they were disobedient to God's command. Therefore, this would disqualify them, first of all, to be the priesthood that would offer the sacrifices, because they themselves had not become holy, without even counting the fact that they were in open disobedience against God.
And so Moses said, "Why have you not eaten the sin offering in the place of the sanctuary since it is a thing most holy and has been given to you that you may bear the iniquity of the congregation, to make atonement for them before the Lord?" In other words, that you might become holy so that you in turn could offer the blood sacrifices, so that atonement might be available to the congregation. These blood sacrifices, of course, were anticipating the sacrifice of Christ.
CALLER: I sometimes forget the fact that everything has to be looked upon in the Christo-centric principle.
HC: Yes. Everything has got to be looked upon in the light of everything else in the Bible. And then you're going to have to include Christ. And so much of the Bible focuses on the coming of Christ. Just a tremendous percentage of the Old Testament passages focus on the first coming of Christ, although there are a number of them that focus upon Judgment Day also.
CALLER: Now we're told in Leviticus 6 that the sin offering is to be eaten, but they were not to drink the blood.
HC: Well, they were not to partake of the blood. The blood was to be poured into the ground or, of course, in the sacrifices it was sprinkled on the mercy seat, sprinkled on the altar, because it represented the blood of Christ. It was not to be eaten in any way, because the life was in the blood. The blood was to be put into the ground. This was simply God's command.
CALLER: But the way it's mentioned in verse 30 of Chapter 6, it seems that the blood has already been removed from the offering, because it says that "No sin offering shall be eaten from which any blood is brought into the tent of meeting. It shall be burned with fire."
HC: Yes. Let's see. In verse 24 we read: "Say to Aaron and his sons, 'This is the law of the sin offering. In the place where the burnt offering is killed shall the sin offering be killed. Before the Lord it is most holy. The priest who offers it for sin shall eat it. In a holy place it shall be eaten, in the court of the tent of meeting.'"
Okay. So he eats the burnt offering that is killed for the sin offering. And the priest that offers it eats it. Now that all ties together with partaking of the body of Christ. "Whatever touches its flesh shall be holy, and when any of its blood is sprinkled on the garment, you shall wash that on which it was sprinkled in a holy place."
Just touching the altar would make one holy. It's picked up, for example, in Isaiah 6, where coals are taken from the altar and touched on Isaiah's lips, so that he becomes holy. He says, "I am a man of unclean lips." And then the angel took a coal from the altar and touched his lips, so that he might be qualified to be a witness.
Well then it goes on. "And the earthen vessel in which it is boiled shall be broken, but if it is boiled in a bronze vessel, that shall be scoured and rinsed in water. Every male among the priests may eat of it. It is most holy. But no sin offering shall be eaten from which any blood is brought into the tent of meeting, to make atonement in the holy place. It shall be burned with fire." Now this is not saying that the blood has simply been removed from the sin offering. The blood was always poured into the ground or used for sprinkling on the altar, but where the blood is brought into the tent of meeting for that particular purpose of making atonement in the holy place. "It shall be burned with fire." Now I don't know the implication of that right offhand.
CALLER: Well, does the same thing go for the cereal offering, where we're told in Chapter 6 that "they shall eat the remaining part?" In other words, they should not eat it all, but they should eat only the remaining part.
HC: Yes, I think so.
CALLER: What about the unholy fire that we're told about in Chapter 10, where the sons of Aaron are both killed? Did they sin in that they arbitrarily offered a sacrifice that the Lord had not instructed them to offer?
HC: Yes. Again, it was an act of rebellion. They were not following the prescribed rules. They were saying, "Well, we can do it our way." This was unholy fire.
CALLER: Why did Aaron answer Moses in such a way in verse 19 of Chapter 10? Could you interpret that for me?
HC: No. I'm not really sure why he did, either. Aaron said to Moses, "Behold, today they have offered their sin offering and their burnt offering before the Lord, and yet such things as these have befallen me. If I had eaten sin offering today, would it have been acceptable in the sight of the Lord? And when Moses heard that, he was content."
I don't know what the context is here. I think the one truth we can get from this, however, is that God is very patient with us in our sin, and Moses frequently is a type of Christ. And God just doesn't strike us down. Actually, because of the rebellion of these sons, God's judgment should have come upon them. But God is very patient with us in our sin.
Now there must be more meaning to it than this, but that's all that I can offer right at the moment.