Introduction
The Word of God teaches that the Christian is not
only a child of God, but a priest: “to him who loves us, and has
washed us from our sins in his blood, and made us a kingdom, priests
to his God and Father” (Rev. 1: 5, 6). By contrast, the entrenched
orthodoxy around us teaches that only a select few are separated
apart for occupation with holy things. Conscious of this, many think
that being “made … priests to his God and Father” refers exclusively
to the future. The expression is quoted twice more in Revelation
when it clearly refers to the future (see Rev. 5: 10; 20: 6) but
this hardly means that Rev. 1: 6 does not refer to the present. If
we are not made priests already, then neither are we
washed from our sins in Christ’s blood already.
Elsewhere we read that
we
are a “holy
priesthood” (1 Pet. 2: 5)—not just some of us, but
all of us, and not
just one day, but
now. Of course, in
the passage quoted, Peter is addressing “[the] sojourners of [the]
dispersion” (1 Pet. 1: 1)—Jewish
believers—and in Judaism it was a great evil even for Korah and his
band to seek to be priests, despite being of the tribe of Levi (see
Num. 16: 10, 11). This was because in the old order, priesthood was
strictly limited to the sons of Aaron. Only they could “come near to
Jehovah” (Exod. 19: 22). Peter’s subject, however, is not Judaism
but the “living hope” which those to whom he is writing had received
“through [the] resurrection of Jesus Christ from among [the] dead”
(1 Pet. 1: 3). Consequent upon this, he speaks of “yourselves also”
(that is, all, not some) are “being built up a spiritual house, a
holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by
Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. 2: 5). Thus, there is no limitation now in the
priesthood. Inevitably, however, the question arises: How
has this great change been brought about?
The Way into the Holiest
In the simplest terms, a prophet comes
out from God while a
priest goes
in to God, and it
follows that if all are now priests, then there must have been a
change of access in order for all to go in. Heb. 9: 8 tells us that
“the
way of the [holy of]
holies has not yet been made manifest while as yet the first
tabernacle has [its] standing” (my emphasis). Now “into the first
tabernacle the priests enter at all times, accomplishing the
services; but into the second, the high priest only, once a year,
not without blood, which he offers for himself and for the errors of
the people” (vs. 6, 7). Thus, even the priests could not enter the
second tabernacle or holy of holies except for the high priest alone
on the Day of Atonement. What the sacrifice of Christ has done,
however, is to not only make all God’s people priests, but it has
enabled every one of them to
access the holy of holies at all times—that sanctuary where
even the priests could not go, and which the high priest could enter
only on one day a year (see Lev. 16: 2, 13). The wonderful truth
flowing out of the Gospel is that the Christian has “boldness for
entering into the [holy of] holies by the blood of Jesus, the new
and living way which he has dedicated for us through the veil, that
is, his flesh” (Heb. 10: 19, 20). Therefore, concludes the writer,
“[having] a great priest over the house of God, let us approach with
a true heart, in full assurance of faith, sprinkled as to our hearts
from a wicked conscience, and washed as to our body with pure water”
(vs. 20-22). Any Jew reading of such sprinkling and washing would be
carried back in his mind to Exodus 29 and the consecration ritual of
the priesthood, and yet, at the same time, recognise that the writer
of Hebrews was speaking of believers being constituted priests in a
far higher sense than ever Aaron’s family was. It follows that any
worship today conducted without assurance as regards access
necessarily falls back in character to that which typified the old
order.
Of course, the
Christian could never go into the sanctuary unless God had first
come out. Before the Lord Jesus entered manhood, God had “spoken in
many parts and in many ways” (Heb. 1: 1), but the wonderful truth
regarding His nature (that He is love—see 1 John 4: 8, 16) had not
been declared. God said, “that he would dwell in the thick darkness”
(1 Kings 8: 12), and when the Law was given, “Moses drew near to the
obscurity where God was” (Exod. 20: 21). However, when Christ died,
the veil of the
temple was rent in
two from the top to the bottom (see Matt. 27: 51), demonstrating
that God had come out in blessing to man, and so declaring His love.
Now the temple, as is well-known, was a vessel of display, and its
glory could be appreciated by all, even by those who did not enter
it. It is fitting, therefore, that the truth of God coming out
should be associated with the temple. When we come to the matter of
going into the presence of God, however, we find that it is the
tabernacle that is taken up, a vessel whose beauty could only be
appreciated by those within it. The book of Hebrews deals with the
tabernacle not the temple, and its veil is viewed as still in place,
and that we enter the holy of holies through it. The “blood of
Jesus” (Heb. 10: 19) gives us boldness to enter, while “through the
veil, that is, his flesh” (v20) is the way in. We gain access
through the Man that died. Not only that, but we also have a “great
priest over the house of God” (v21—for it is surely in the company
of the risen and glorified Christ that we find ourselves in the
holiest of all. Sadly, while the truth of God coming out in blessing
in the Gospel is still going out to the whole world, the parallel
truth of our going into the divine presence is much obscured by the
Judaizing of Christianity. There is great loss when ecclesiastical
arrangements are such that the individual believer in Christ is put
at a distance and can only think of drawing near to God by proxy.
Christendom and Priesthood
Conscious of the great contrast between what is
taught in Scripture and what is accepted as orthodoxy, some have
argued that the position of the Assembly is analogous to that of Israel
in relation to priesthood—that is, while all Israel had
the
promise of
priesthood, in
practice only the
family of Aaron could minister in the sanctuary. Hence, it is
concluded, the Assembly must also contain a special priestly class
of persons that direct, regulate and administer the worship of God
on behalf of the rest. The Scripture in question is Exod. 19: 5, 6:
“if ye will hearken to my voice indeed and keep my covenant, then
shall ye be my own possession out of all the peoples—for all the
earth is mine—and ye shall be to me a kingdom of priests, and a holy
nation”. However, what we have here is not analogous to Christianity
but in contrast. The promise made to Israel was clearly
conditional— ‘if
ye will hearken’—and the history of the nation is a painful witness
of their failure in that regard. As a nation they never lived up to
God’s mind for them, and so the priesthood remained limited in
extent. By contrast, in Christianity, all is
unconditional. Our
priesthood is based, not on our works, but on what Christ has done,
hence: “to him who loves us, and has washed us from our sins in his
blood, and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father” (Rev.
1: 5, 6). This is not a conditional promise—indeed, it is not a
promise at all, but a statement of what has already been done. That
is why Peter takes up the verses from Exodus 19 and (addressing
Christians) says, “ye
[are] a chosen race, a kingly priesthood, a holy nation” (1 Pet. 2:
9). He addresses them, not as what they will be, but as
what they already are.
There is, therefore, no parallel between the division in Israel of
people and priests, and Biblical Christianity, and any notion of a
special priestly caste today unjustly removes the dignity that
belongs to all the people of God as a royal
priesthood. The writer of the book of Hebrews may have been in the
position of a teacher or a leader, yet he puts himself alongside
those he is instructing when he says: “let
us approach” (Heb.
10: 22, my emphasis). Sadly, the tendency of the human heart is
always to regress, and even where the doctrine of the priesthood of
all believers is maintained as a doctrine, an unofficial
priestly class can become established if, for example, the natural
confidence of one brother and the natural reticence of another are
allowed to follow their course.
Priests by Sovereign
Choice
The reader must not imagine, however, that there
are no parallels between the limited priesthood in Israel and the
universal priesthood in Christianity, for while the OT Scriptures
may not always be for us to
replicate, they are
certainly “written for our
instruction” (Rom.
15: 4, my emphasis). The book of Hebrews takes up much of this OT
imagery and compares and contrasts Aaron and Christ our great high
priest. However, we also read there of Christians as “many sons”
brought “to glory” (Heb. 2: 10) and a connection with “Aaron’s sons”
(Lev. 8: 13) seems warranted. It is in Aaron’s sons then that we
will find much instruction as to our position as priests.
Now Aaron’s sons
were priests by birth—they were priests because they were sons of
Aaron. The divine instruction was that “no stranger who is not of
the seed of Aaron” could “come near to burn incense before Jehovah”
(Num. 16: 40). No interest, talents, wealth, or anything else could
procure the office. Later, when some came forward professing to be
priests but could not trace their genealogy, they were excluded from
the priesthood as polluted (see Neh. 7: 64). Now just as Aaron’s
sons were priests of Jehovah by His sovereign choice, so it has
pleased God to
make us priests to
his God and Father (see Rev. 1: 6). It was His act—we had nothing to
do with it, and no human arrangement had anything to do with it
either.
The unique
relationship between Aaron and his sons meant that they were also
uniquely associated with him in the service of the sanctuary: “and I
will hallow Aaron and his sons, that they may serve me as priests”
(Exod. 29: 44). In the same way every believer is brought into real
relationship with Christ our great High Priest for “he that
sanctifies and those sanctified [are] all of one; for which cause he
is not ashamed to call us brethren” (Heb. 2: 11). Furthermore,
having liberty to enter the holiest of all, where Christ as Son acts
as the “minister of the holy places” (Heb. 8: 2), we “offer
spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. 2:
5). As none but Aaron and his sons had access to the holy place for
the service of priesthood, so now all who are priests, and no one
else, have liberty to enter the holiest where Christ is. However,
there can be no privilege without responsibility, and this leads on
to:
Wine and Strong Drink
Besides abstaining from unclean things (which was
incumbent on every Israelite) the priests were not to drink wine or
strong drink: “And Jehovah spoke to Aaron, saying, Thou shalt not
drink wine nor strong drink, thou, and thy sons with thee, when ye
go into the tent of meeting, lest ye die—[it is] an everlasting
statute throughout your generations, that ye may put difference
between the holy and the unholy, and between unclean and clean, and
that ye may teach the children of Israel all the statutes which
Jehovah hath spoken to them by the hand of Moses” (Lev. 10: 8-11).
As exercising their priestly function, the sons of Aaron were to
refrain from anything that might stimulate the natural passions, and
in the same vein, the Holy Spirit enjoins us to “abstain from
fleshly lusts, which war against the soul” (1 Pet. 2: 11). Many seem
to think that they can be occupied with all kinds of dubious
activities during the week, and yet stand in God’s presence in an
attitude of worship on the Lord’s Day. It is not possible, “for the
mind of the flesh [is] death” (Rom. 8: 6) and such behaviour
inevitably results in lethargy and lifelessness as regards the
things of God. Indeed, there is a real possibility of presenting
“strange fire” (Lev. 10: 1) in attempting to look and sound
spiritual for the occasion.
Again, why do some
Christians have such difficulty in perceiving what to others is
clearly unholy and unclean in God’s sight? Or why is there sometimes
such a difference of judgment about evil among many of the Lord’s
people? The answer to these questions is plain. There will be no
ability to put difference “between the holy and the unholy, and
between unclean and clean” (Lev. 10: 10) when the walk is careless
and fleshly habits are indulged. Spiritual discernment is a product
of habitually being in the presence of God. There is also another
reason to avoid what is typified by wine and strong drink—it is in
order “that ye may teach the children of Israel all the statutes
which Jehovah hath spoken to them by the hand of Moses” (Lev. 10:
11) for “the priest’s lips should keep knowledge” (Mal. 2: 7).
People wonder why the quality of teaching has degenerated among the
Lord’s people, but at least part of the answer can be found in the
indulgence of the ‘harmless’ flesh, and the associated lack of
dedication to the Lord’s things. In the same way that strong drink
clouds the mental faculty, so spiritual apprehension is hindered by
occupation with what ministers to the natural passions. It is a
solemn thing when Christians with a rich heritage of sound teaching
have become “such as have need of milk, [and] not of solid food”
(Heb. 5: 12) and instead of being able to teach others need to be
taught the basics again. Such elementary instruction is required
because “solid food belongs to full-grown men, who, on account of
habit, have their senses exercised for distinguishing
both good and evil” (v14, my emphasis).
Elementary
instruction includes, of course, the truth of what God has done to
fit us to serve in His presence, and for that we must consider:
The Induction of the
Priests
Aaron’s sons were qualified to be priests on
account of their parentage, but they had to be inducted into the
office before they could perform their priestly functions. The
amount of preparation necessary was considerable, and this
fact may raise serious questions in the mind of the believer as to
whether he has fully understood why he was saved—clearly
the divine intention is that we were saved to serve, not only
before men, but before God—that is, in His presence. Indeed, we are
to “offer [the] sacrifice of praise continually to
God” (Heb. 13: 15, my emphasis)!
Firstly, “Moses
brought Aaron near, and his sons, and bathed them with water” (Lev.
8: 6; see Exod. 29: 4). This answers to John 13 and what the Lord
said to Peter: “He that is washed all over needs not to wash save
his feet, but is wholly clean” (v10; see 1 Cor. 6: 11). The
Christian has a new nature as a result of being “born of water and
of spirit” (John 3: 5)—a nature that has different tastes and
interests to the old. Without this moral cleansing there can be no
entering upon the Christian priesthood—and there can be no moral
cleansing without a sovereign action of God in new birth. Anything
of man is totally excluded. Therefore, “let us approach with a true
heart, in full assurance of faith, sprinkled as to our hearts from a
wicked conscience, and washed as to our body with pure water” (Heb.
10: 22). Of course, the priests needed to cleanse themselves
thereafter from daily defilement, and so they washed their hands and
feet at the laver every time they drew near the altar to minister
(see Exod. 30: 19-21)—but their initial washing all over was
fundamental. It is the same with the Christian: he needs both “born
of water” (John 3: 5) and the daily “washing of water by [the] word”
(Eph. 5: 26) if he is to function as a priest.
Secondly, “Moses
brought Aaron’s sons near and clothed them with the vests, and
girded them with the girdles, and bound the high caps on them, as
Jehovah had commanded Moses” (Lev. 8: 13; See Exod. 29: 8, 9). We
are not left to guess the significance of this, for we are
specifically told that these garments were “for glory and for
ornament” (Exod. 28: 40). There is thus a dignity and a splendour
that attaches to every Christian as fitted by God to enter His
presence. The “linen trousers” (v42) are viewed separately and are
there only to ensure that there is nothing to detract from the glory
of the high office, and nothing unfitting for the august setting in
which the priestly functions are carried out. Thus, on the one hand,
there should be no shrinking back from the exercise of our priestly
duties as Christians on the grounds of our lack of fitness, and on
the other hand, there needs to be a deep awareness in the soul of
the holiness and majesty of the One in whose presence we are.
Thirdly, Aaron and
his sons were to lay their hands on the head of the bullock of the
sin-offering (see Exod. 29: 10-14; Lev. 8: 14-17) and the head of
the ram of the burnt offering (see Exod. 29: 15-18; Lev. 8: 18-21).
There is not the space to go into detail here, but the laying on of
hands speaks of identification with the offering of Christ, both for
sin, and as a sweet-smelling savour to God. This was indispensable
before there could be any thought of approaching God. Not only must
there be “no longer any conscience of sins” (Heb. 10: 2), but also a
deep sense of the preciousness to God of the One who “delivered
himself up for us, an offering and sacrifice to God for a
sweet-smelling savour” (Eph. 5: 2).
Lastly, we enter
upon a second, more intense phase of the induction into the
priesthood, centred on “the second ram, the “ram of consecration”
(Lev. 8: 22). The whole of this part of the procedure can be summed
up as “thou … shalt
anoint them, and
consecrate them, and
hallow them” (Exod.
28: 41, my emphasis).
The Ram of Consecration
Moses was to bring Aaron’s sons near and put the
blood of the ram of consecration “on the tip of their right ear, and
on the thumb of their right hand, and on the great toe of their
right foot” (Lev. 8: 24; see Exod. 29: 19-21). In this way they were
set apart for God and His service, just as Christians are exhorted
to “present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God,
[which is] your intelligent service” (Rom. 12: 1). The right ear was
marked with blood to teach us that we are not to listen to the evil
and foolish communications of this world, but to heed what God says
in His Word. The blood on the thumb of the right hand is to teach us
that we are now to use our strength to work for God, and the blood
on the blood on the great toe of the right foot is to show that our
walk should be in obedience to Him who left us “a model that ye
should follow in his steps” (1 Pet. 2: 21). This once-for-all action
separated them out as Jehovah’s priests forever. Thus, not only are
we justified by blood (see Rom. 5: 9), but the Lord also died that
“he might sanctify” us “by his own blood” (Heb. 13:
12, my emphasis).
Following this, we
have what is called the “consecration-offering” (Lev.
8: 28, my emphasis), that was “waved and heaved up” (Exod. 29: 27)
and burned “over the burnt-offering” (Lev. 8: 28). The word
consecration literally means the filling of the hands and
so we have what was put “into Aaron’s hands, and into his son’s
hands” (v27) and waved before Jehovah, and then what was taken “from
off their hands” (v28) and offered up on the altar (see Exod. 29:
22-25). Without going into detail, the unleavened cakes, the oiled
bread, the wafer, the fat and the right shoulder which were
all pressed into the priest’s hands (see Lev. 8: 26, 27)
speak in type of Christ.
Hence the Holy Spirit gives us impressions of that blessed One which
we are then to
present to God in the
most holy place, in order that their sweet-smelling savour might
give Him pleasure. Where do we get these impressions? By spending
time in prayerful meditation over God’s Word. It is no excuse to say
that there is not time, for we are to redeem the time (see Eph. 5:
16). Furthermore, we must all bring something—otherwise we shall
drift into congregationalism and lose the true sense of a
worshipping company.
Next Aaron and his
sons were anointed.
Anointing in the context means to mark out for the office,
and has the effect of
hallowing or separating to God: “and thou shalt take of the
blood that is upon the altar, and of the anointing oil, and sprinkle
[it] on Aaron, and on his garments, and on his sons, and on the
garments of his sons with him; and he shall be hallowed, and his
garments, and his sons, and his sons’ garments with him” (Exod. 29:
21; see Lev. 8: 30). Aaron’s sons being anointed with oil is an
unmistakable type of the Christian being anointed with the Holy
Spirit, as in 2 Cor. 1: 21: “Now he that establishes us with you in
Christ, and has anointed us, [is] God, who also has sealed us, and
given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts”. This anointing is
our power for service and is what makes the character of priesthood
now to be spiritual and holy. We are those who “worship by [the]
Spirit of God” (Phil. 3: 3). Note, however, that the oil is
accompanied by the blood from off the altar. Aaron, as a type of
Christ, had already been anointed by oil alone (see Lev. 8: 12) but
Christ’s brethren, as typified by Aaron’s sons, must be sprinkled
with blood and oil together in order to serve.
Finally, “Moses
spoke to Aaron and to his sons, Boil the flesh at the entrance of
the tent of meeting; and there eat it and the bread that is in the
basket of the consecration-offering, as I commanded, saying, Aaron
and his sons shall eat it” (Lev. 8: 31). Thus, the priests were to
eat—not merely to look at and talk about, but to handle and receive,
so as to derive nourishment, strength, refreshment and comfort, from
“the things with which the atonement was made” (Exod. 29: 33). As
the Lord Jesus Himself said, “my flesh is truly food and my blood is
truly drink” (John 6: 55). Unless we eat, we cannot possibly
carry on the high and holy functions of priesthood—we
will not be worshippers.
Conclusion
Much more could be said, but few will doubt how
feebly Christians have entered the high and holy service of being
priests to “his God and Father” (Rev. 1: 6)—the Father of that One
of whom it could be said that “in [the] midst of [the] assembly will
I sing thy praises” (Heb. 2: 12). Regrettably, so much of what takes
the name of the Lord these days is self-centred and man-centred,
rather than being Christ-centred and God-centred. It goes without
saying that these are matters of the utmost seriousness. Reader, how
is it with you?
