Bible Translations

1. English Bible Versions: Which Translation Should I Use?

   1. Two Basic Philosophies of Translation: Form or Meaning Based

      1. Formal Equivalence (literal, “word-for-word,” form-based)

         • American Standard Version of 1901 (slightly edited form of Revised Version, British revision of the KJV)

         • New American Standard Bible (based on the 1901 ASV; most literal mid-20^th century version)

         • King James Version (revision primarily of Bishop’s Bible with some input from Tyndale, Coverdale, & Geneva)

         • New King James Version (modernizing of the KJV; based on TR)

         • English Standard Version (essentially literal, in the line of the KJV’s heritage)

         • Revised Standard Version (revision of the 1901 ASV)

         • New Revised Standard Version (revision of the RSV)

         • Douay-Rheims American Version (originally a replacement for the Geneva [Protestant] and Bishop’s [Anglican] Bibles, source: Vulgate)

         • Green’s Literal Translation (an exact literal, word-for-word translation of the Masoretic Hebrew Text and the Greek Received Text (Textus Receptus), now named the King James Version 3)

      2. Functional Equivalence (dynamic equivalent, idiomatic, meaning-based)

         • New Jerusalem Bible (1^st Roman Catholic to rely extensively on orig. lang. MSS)

1. 1. 1. • Revised English Bible (British revision of the NEB; extensive textual emendations)

         • Good News Bible (formerly “Today’s English Version”; simplified vocabulary)

         • Complete Jewish Bible (Jewish-flavored revision of existing translations)

         • New Living Translation (7^th grade reading level)

         • The Living Bible (loose paraphrase; similarly, The Message)

         • Phillips Modern English (translation from critical text in the revised edition)

         • Contemporary English Version (targeted to 3^rd grade reading level)

      2. A Blend of Dynamic and Functional Equivalence

         • New International Version (new translation based on a critical text)

         • Today’s New International Version (gender sensitive rendering of the NIV; being removed from distribution when a new NIV is released in 2011)

         • Holman Christian Standard Bible (called “optimal” equivalence )

         • New American Bible (Roman Catholic; more formal than Jerusalem Bible)

         • New English Translation (1^st Internet-based Bible)

         • Murdock’s Translation (translation of the Peshitta, Aramaic NT)

         • Modern Language Bible (new revision of the Berkeley Bible, intentionally contemporary)

1. 1. What about paraphrases?

      1. Most interpretive of any rendering

      2. Often loses inter-textual connections
         Gen. 48:15 He has been with me all my life (CEV)
         Psalm 23:1 You, Lord, are my shepherd (CEV)

         Gen. 48:15 God who has been my shepherd all my life (ESV)
         Psalm 23:1 The Lord is my shepherd (ESV)

      3. Loses richness of expression with increased interpretive focus

      4. Often most culturally/linguistically dated use of language and idiom

      5. Often are rendered from a translation rather than original language text

      6. Can provide an effective way to grasp the big picture; The Book of God by Walter Wangerin, for example

   2. Why Do We Need Translation?

      1. Hebrew, Chaldean and Greek are not our first language

      2. The time and culture of the Bible’s authors isn’t ours

      3. The time and culture of previous translators isn’t ours

         • language changes with time

         • language is somewhat dependent on culture

   3. Strengths and Dangers of Both Formal and Functional Equivalent Versions

      1. Strengths of Functional Equivalence

         • “Functional, or dynamic, equivalence” has been called the “thought-for-thought” approach to translation. In this method, translators seek to express the meaning of the original Hebrew or Greek into clear and natural, contemporary English. The strength of “functional equivalence” is its clarity; however, the approach increases the risks of interpretive bias, which is present in all translation. (Rev. Dr. Paul Anderson Day, Executive Director, Bible Society of Maine )

      2. Strengths of Formal Equivalence Versions

         • “Formal equivalence” has been called the “word-for-word” approach to translation. In this method, translators seek to render the original Hebrew or Greek words and sentence structure as nearly as possible into English. The strength of “formal equivalence” lies in its closeness to the original; however, it can result in an awkward English style. Moreover, literal accuracy can lead modern readers to misunderstand the meaning of God’s Word. (Rev. Dr. Paul Anderson Day, Executive Director, Bible Society of Maine )

   4. Conclusion

4. Bible Translation

1. English Bible Versions: Which Translation Should I Use?

   1. Two Basic Philosophies of Translation: Form or Meaning Based

      1. Formal Equivalence (literal, “word-for-word,” form-based)

         • American Standard Version of 1901 (slightly edited form of Revised Version, British revision of the KJV)

         • New American Standard Bible (based on the 1901 ASV; most literal mid-20^th century version)

         • King James Version (revision primarily of Bishop’s Bible with some input from Tyndale, Coverdale, & Geneva)

         • New King James Version (modernizing of the KJV; based on TR)

         • English Standard Version (essentially literal, in the line of the KJV’s heritage)

         • Revised Standard Version (revision of the 1901 ASV)

         • New Revised Standard Version (revision of the RSV)

         • Douay-Rheims American Version (originally a replacement for the Geneva [Protestant] and Bishop’s [Anglican] Bibles, source: Vulgate)

         • Green’s Literal Translation (an exact literal, word-for-word translation of the Masoretic Hebrew Text and the Greek Received Text (Textus Receptus), now named the King James Version 3)

      2. Functional Equivalence (dynamic equivalent, idiomatic, meaning-based)

         • New Jerusalem Bible (1^st Roman Catholic to rely extensively on orig. lang. MSS)

1. 1. 1. • Revised English Bible (British revision of the NEB; extensive textual emendations)

         • Good News Bible (formerly “Today’s English Version”; simplified vocabulary)

         • Complete Jewish Bible (Jewish-flavored revision of existing translations)

         • New Living Translation (7^th grade reading level)

         • The Living Bible (loose paraphrase; similarly, The Message)

         • Phillips Modern English (translation from critical text in the revised edition)

         • Contemporary English Version (targeted to 3^rd grade reading level)

      2. A Blend of Dynamic and Functional Equivalence

         • New International Version (new translation based on a critical text)

         • Today’s New International Version (gender sensitive rendering of the NIV; being removed from distribution when a new NIV is released in 2011)

         • Holman Christian Standard Bible (called “optimal” equivalence )

         • New American Bible (Roman Catholic; more formal than Jerusalem Bible)

         • New English Translation (1^st Internet-based Bible)

         • Murdock’s Translation (translation of the Peshitta, Aramaic NT)

         • Modern Language Bible (new revision of the Berkeley Bible, intentionally contemporary)

1. 1. What about paraphrases?

      1. Most interpretive of any rendering

      2. Often loses inter-textual connections
         Gen. 48:15 He has been with me all my life (CEV)
         Psalm 23:1 You, Lord, are my shepherd (CEV)

         Gen. 48:15 God who has been my shepherd all my life (ESV)
         Psalm 23:1 The Lord is my shepherd (ESV)

      3. Loses richness of expression with increased interpretive focus

      4. Often most culturally/linguistically dated use of language and idiom

      5. Often are rendered from a translation rather than original language text

      6. Can provide an effective way to grasp the big picture; The Book of God by Walter Wangerin, for example

   2. Why Do We Need Translation?

      1. Hebrew, Chaldean and Greek are not our first language

      2. The time and culture of the Bible’s authors isn’t ours

      3. The time and culture of previous translators isn’t ours

         • language changes with time

         • language is somewhat dependent on culture

   3. Strengths and Dangers of Both Formal and Functional Equivalent Versions

      1. Strengths of Functional Equivalence

         • “Functional, or dynamic, equivalence” has been called the “thought-for-thought” approach to translation. In this method, translators seek to express the meaning of the original Hebrew or Greek into clear and natural, contemporary English. The strength of “functional equivalence” is its clarity; however, the approach increases the risks of interpretive bias, which is present in all translation. (Rev. Dr. Paul Anderson Day, Executive Director, Bible Society of Maine )

      2. Strengths of Formal Equivalence Versions

         • “Formal equivalence” has been called the “word-for-word” approach to translation. In this method, translators seek to render the original Hebrew or Greek words and sentence structure as nearly as possible into English. The strength of “formal equivalence” lies in its closeness to the original; however, it can result in an awkward English style. Moreover, literal accuracy can lead modern readers to misunderstand the meaning of God’s Word. (Rev. Dr. Paul Anderson Day, Executive Director, Bible Society of Maine )

   4. Conclusion

The Canon of Scripture

1. The Canon of Scripture
   1. The Meaning of Canon
      1. A simple definition: a rule of faith and practice.

         The word “canon” is of Christian origin, from the Greek word kanon, which in turn is probably borrowed from the Hebrew word, qaneh, meaning a reed or measuring rod, hence, norm or rule. Later it came to mean a rule of faith, and eventually a catalog or list. In present usage it signifies a collection of religious writings Divinely inspired and hence, authoritative, normative, sacred and binding. The term occurs in Gal 6:16; 2Cor 10:13-16; but it is first employed of the books of Scripture in the technical sense of a standard collection or body of sacred writings, by the church Fathers of the 4th century; e. g. in the 59th canon of the Council of Laodicea (363 AD); in the Festal Epistle of Athanasius (365 AD); and by Amphilochius, archbishop of Iconium (395 AD). ISBE

      2. Why is the canon and its extent important?

         If the canon of Scripture is “the list of all the books that belong in the Bible”, and if the Bible is our rule of faith and practice, then it is essential we have a correct and complete canon in order to rightly believe and behave. We must know all of what God has revealed to his people and we must regard only what he has revealed as authoritatively binding on our consciences.

   2. The Fundamental Test of Canonicity (Matt. 22:34-40; Luke 24:44; Eph. 2:19-22; 2 Tim. 3:14-17; 2 Pet. 1:19-21; 3:1-2)
      1. What does it say about itself?
         1. Is that a circular argument?

            The final answer to the question – what is the test of inspiration and therefore of canonicity – must come from the Bible itself. And this is not necessarily circular reasoning. The major portions of the New Testament can be accepted, for the sake of the argument, as historical records, excellently attested, giving us testimony as to the teachings of Christ and the apostles. So we reject the claim that the argument is circular. It is not that our view of inspiration of the Bible rests on the Bible’s teaching about itself. The basis of our view on inspiration and therefore canonicity is the authority of Christ. We have abundant admitted historical testimony to the person and authority of Christ in the major Pauline Epistles, to name only this one source. Believing in this supernatural Christ, we receive the assurance of salvation given by the supernatural work of the Holy Spirit. This inward testimony of the Holy Spirit to our salvation assures us of the adequacy of our full belief in Christ. On this basis, we trust Christ’s word in further areas – his commands, his promises, and his certification to the words of the Old Testament prophets and his chosen apostles. Harris, Inspiration and Canonicity, p.233

         2. Does it claim to be the word of God?
         3. Is it treated as the word of God in other parts of Scripture?
         4. Is it treated as the word of God by the Son of God?
   3. Tests the People of God Have Used to Recognize Canonicity
      1. Old Testament
         1. Was the writing recognized by its contemporaries as having been written by someone authorized to speak for God? Did it carry the weight of authority immediately from the time of writing?
         2. What was the view of the Jewish church concerning the writing?
         3. Similarly, what was the view of Jesus and his disciples (the apostles, incl. Paul) concerning the writing?
         4. Probably of the least weight, what volumes were seen as belonging to the canon by secular writers – Josephus, Philo, Qumran fragments, etc.
      2. New Testament
         1. Was the writing recognized by its contemporaries as having been written by someone authorized to speak for God? Did it carry the weight of authority immediately from the time of writing?
         2. Similarly, what was the view of the apostles concerning the writing? (e.g., Jude 17-18 & 2 Pet. 3:2-3; 2 Pet. 3:14-16; 1 Tim. 5:18 & Luke 10:7)
         3. What was the view of the early church concerning the writing? Church fathers such as: Irenaeus, Tertullian, Ignatius, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, etc.
   4. Formal Recognition of the Canon
      1. Septuagint – Greek translation dating from ca. 250 B.C.
      2. Melito (quoted in Eusebius) from ca. 170 A.D. – lists all the present OT except Esther
      3. Muratorian Canon – NT list compiled by Muratori prior to 170 A.D.; the manuscript (and thus perhaps the list) is incomplete, lacking Hebrews, James, 2 Peter and 1 John. Also refuting pseudepigraphical books as belonging to the canon – e.g. Apocalypse of Peter and Shepherd of Hermas

      4. Thirty-ninth Paschal Letter of Athanasius, 367 A.D. – same OT list as Melito, NT list of the 27 books accepted as canonical by the church of the eastern Mediterranean

      5. Council of Carthage, 397 A.D. – the same list, agreed to by the church of the western Mediterranean

   5. Why Not Other Books? That is, why not the apocryphal-deuterocanonical-pseudepigraphical books?

      Apocryphal – Greek word, things which are hidden; unknown why applied to extra-biblical texts

      Deuterocanonical – Roman Catholic term, second canon or rule, added later to the canon; declared to be part of the canon at Council of Trent, 1546 as part of Counter Reformation and a necessary support for certain R.C. Doctrine (prayers for the dead, purgatory, justification by faith plus works)

      Pseudepigraphical – false authorship; the real author attributed the writing to a prior figure of significant stature (e.g., Gospels of Barnabas, Peter, Thomas, Judas; Book of Enoch; Psalms of Solomon)

      1. They do not claim the same authority for themselves
      2. They were not regarded as of divine origin by the Jewish people
      3. They were not considered Scripture by Jesus or cited as such in the New Testament
      4. They contain teaching which contradicts that found in the books accepted as canonical
      5. They contain explicit statements denying canonical status
   6. The Usefulness of Extra-Biblical Literature
      1. historical records
      2. language research
      3. cultural information

         Most come from the period 200 BC to 200 AD, a time from which there is not much else by way of Jewish writing known to be in existence. A vassal state much of the time, records are particularly scarce from the second half of the period. This is not surprising considering the fall of Jerusalem to Titus in 70 AD followed by the crushing of the Bar Kochba revolt in 135 AD.

   7. A Key Question: Is the Canon Closed? (Heb. 1:1-2a; Acts 1:21-22; 1 Cor. 9:1; 15:7-8)
      1. God’s final word of revelation to us was given through the Living Word and recorded in the Written Word by those witnesses who spoke with God-given authority.
      2. The times of the gospel are the last times, the gospel revelation is the last we are to expect from God. There was first the natural revelation; then the patriarchal, by dreams, visions, and voices; then the Mosaic, in the law given forth and written down; then the prophetic, in explaining the law, and giving clearer discoveries of Christ: but now we must expect no new revelation, but only more of the Spirit of Christ to help us better to understand what is already revealed. Matthew Henry on Heb. 1:2

      3. Therefore it pleased the Lord at sundry times, and in divers manners, to reveal himself, and to declare that His will unto his Church; and afterward for the better preserving, and propagating of the Truth, and for the more sure Establishment, and Comfort of the Church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan, and of the World, to commit the same wholly unto (d) writing; which maketh the Holy Scriptures to be most necessary, those former ways of Gods revealing his will unto his people being now ceased. LBCF, I.1

      4. The whole Counsel of God concerning all things (i) necessary for his own Glory, Mans Salvation, Faith and Life, is either expressly set down or necessarily contained in the Holy Scripture; unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new Revelation of the Spirit, or traditions of men. LBCF, I.6

Let it be observed that the proof of the authority of the Scriptures does not rest on a previous proof of their inspiration. Even an uninspired law is law. But when inspiration has once been shown to be fact, it comes mightily to the reinforcement of their authority. God speaks to us now, in Scripture, not only mediately through his representatives, but directly through the Scriptures themselves as his inspired word. The Scriptures thus become the crystallization of God’s authoritative will. We will not say that Christianity might not have been founded and propagated and preserved without inspired writings or even without any written embodiment of the authoritative apostolic teaching. Wherever Christ is known through whatever means, there is Christianity, and men may hear and believe and be saved. But God has caused his grace to abound to us in that he not only published redemption through Christ in the world, but gave this preachment authoritative expression through the apostles, and fixed it with infallible trustworthiness in his inspired word. Thus in every age God speaks directly to every Christian heart, and gives us abounding safety to our feet and divine security to our souls. And thus, instead of a mere record of a revelation given in the past, we have the ever-living word of God; instead of a mere tradition however guarded, we have what we have all learned to call in a unique sense “the Scriptures.” Warfield, Authority and Inspiration of Scripture

Introduction to Biblical Interpretation – 2

3. Introduction to Hermeneutics

   1. Hermeneutics is the science and art of biblical interpretation

      Textual Criticism has for its special object ascertaining of the exact words of the original texts of the sacred books. Its method of procedure is to collate and compare ancient manuscripts, ancient versions, and ancient scripture quotations, and, by careful and discriminating judgment, sift conflicting testimony, weigh the evidences of all kinds, and thus endeavour to determine the true reading of every doubtful text. This science is often called the Lower Criticism. Where such criticism ends, Hermeneutics properly begins, and aims to establish the principles, methods, and rules which are needful to unfold the sense of what is written. Its object is to elucidate [to make clear; explain; remove obscurity from and render intelligible] whatever may be obscure or ill-defined, so that every reader may be able, by an intelligent process, to obtain the exact ideas intended by the author. Exegesis is the application of these principles and laws, the actual bringing out into formal statement, and by other terms, the meaning of the author s words. Exegesis is related to hermeneutics as preaching is to homiletics, or, in general, as practice is to theory. Exposition is another word often used synonymously with exegesis, and has essentially the same signification ; and yet, perhaps, in common usage, exposition denotes a more extended development and illustration of the sense, dealing more largely with other scriptures by comparison and contrast.

      …The textual critic detects interpolations, emends false readings, and aims to give us the very words which the sacred writers used. The exegete takes up these words, and by means of the principles of hermeneutics, defines their meaning, elucidates the scope and plan of each writer, and brings forth the grammatico-historical sense of what each book contains. The expositor builds upon the labours both of critics and exegetes, and sets forth in fuller form, and by ample illustration, the ideas, doctrines, and moral lessons of the Scripture. Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics, pp. 19-20

      1. Hermeneutics deals with the translation aspect of bringing what the original Biblical authors actually wrote to a non-native speaker.

         1. Much of the work has been done by virtue of translation from original language to receptor language.

         2. What is left is to determine the one sense among several a particular word or word group has in a given text.

            1. Is it an idiom?

            2. A figurative expression?

            3. To be understood “literally” and in what sense?

      2. Exegesis deals with explaining the meaning of the words used in their context.

         The prospectors made a strike yesterday up in the mountains.
         The union went on strike this morning.
         The batter made his third strike and was called out by the umpire.
         Strike up the Star Spangled Banner.
         The fisherman got a good strike in the middle of the lake.

      3. Exposition deals with the explanation, illustration and application of concepts and principles communicated by the text.

   2. The Goals of Hermeneutics

      1. Exegesis: To Determine the Meaning of a Passage in its Original Context. (John 1:38, 42; John 9:7; Hebrews 7:2)

      2. Contextualization

   3. Avoid Shortcutting the Hermeneutical Process

      1. Application without exegesis (Matthew 5:17-48)

      2. Exegesis without contextualization (See 2 Peter 1:20, cp. NIV & NKJV; also College Press Commentary)
         
         knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation (NKJV)
         
         Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. (NIV)

         The NIV translation is quite interpretive here, since the original is somewhat ambiguous. The major part of the sentence may also be translated, “No prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation” (NRSV). This translation would imply that Peter is objecting to the private (and incorrect) interpretation of prophecy practiced by the false teachers. However, this understanding does not suit well the preceding (19) and especially the following verse (21). The NIV interpretation seems best.

         The false teachers have rejected not only the teaching of Peter and the other apostles about the coming of Christ but also the teachings of the prophets about this event. Their judgment may have been that God never inspired such prophecies but that the prophets were wrongly interpreting their visions or whatever signs God may have given them. Therefore Peter asserts that all prophecy in Scripture originated with God, not with the prophet. That is to say that not only the visions or dreams came from God but so did the prophets’ understanding of them. This seems to be the point of the next verse. College Press

   4. Summary

2. Introduction to Hermeneutics (Part 2)

1. Introduction to Hermeneutics

   1. Hermeneutics is the science and art of biblical interpretation

      Textual Criticism has for its special object ascertaining of the exact words of the original texts of the sacred books. Its method of procedure is to collate and compare ancient manuscripts, ancient versions, and ancient scripture quotations, and, by careful and discriminating judgment, sift conflicting testimony, weigh the evidences of all kinds, and thus endeavour to determine the true reading of every doubtful text. This science is often called the Lower Criticism. Where such criticism ends, Hermeneutics properly begins, and aims to establish the principles, methods, and rules which are needful to unfold the sense of what is written. Its object is to elucidate [to make clear; explain; remove obscurity from and render intelligible] whatever may be obscure or ill-defined, so that every reader may be able, by an intelligent process, to obtain the exact ideas intended by the author. Exegesis is the application of these principles and laws, the actual bringing out into formal statement, and by other terms, the meaning of the author s words. Exegesis is related to hermeneutics as preaching is to homiletics, or, in general, as practice is to theory. Exposition is another word often used synonymously with exegesis, and has essentially the same signification ; and yet, perhaps, in common usage, exposition denotes a more extended development and illustration of the sense, dealing more largely with other scriptures by comparison and contrast.

      …The textual critic detects interpolations, emends false readings, and aims to give us the very words which the sacred writers used. The exegete takes up these words, and by means of the principles of hermeneutics, defines their meaning, elucidates the scope and plan of each writer, and brings forth the grammatico-historical sense of what each book contains. The expositor builds upon the labours both of critics and exegetes, and sets forth in fuller form, and by ample illustration, the ideas, doctrines, and moral lessons of the Scripture. Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics, pp. 19-20

      1. Hermeneutics deals with the translation aspect of bringing what the original Biblical authors actually wrote to a non-native speaker.

         1. Much of the work has been done by virtue of translation from original language to receptor language.

         2. What is left is to determine the one sense among several a particular word or word group has in a given text.

            1. Is it an idiom?

            2. A figurative expression?

            3. To be understood “literally” and in what sense?

      2. Exegesis deals with explaining the meaning of the words used in their context.

         The prospectors made a strike yesterday up in the mountains.
         The union went on strike this morning.
         The batter made his third strike and was called out by the umpire.
         Strike up the Star Spangled Banner.
         The fisherman got a good strike in the middle of the lake.

      3. Exposition deals with the explanation, illustration and application of concepts and principles communicated by the text.

   2. The Goals of Hermeneutics

      1. Exegesis: To Determine the Meaning of a Passage in its Original Context. (John 1:38, 42; John 9:7; Hebrews 7:2)

      2. Contextualization

   3. Avoid Shortcutting the Hermeneutical Process

      1. Application without exegesis (Matthew 5:17-48)

      2. Exegesis without contextualization (See 2 Peter 1:20, cp. NIV & NKJV; also College Press Commentary)
         
         knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation (NKJV)
         
         Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. (NIV)

         The NIV translation is quite interpretive here, since the original is somewhat ambiguous. The major part of the sentence may also be translated, “No prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation” (NRSV). This translation would imply that Peter is objecting to the private (and incorrect) interpretation of prophecy practiced by the false teachers. However, this understanding does not suit well the preceding (19) and especially the following verse (21). The NIV interpretation seems best.

         The false teachers have rejected not only the teaching of Peter and the other apostles about the coming of Christ but also the teachings of the prophets about this event. Their judgment may have been that God never inspired such prophecies but that the prophets were wrongly interpreting their visions or whatever signs God may have given them. Therefore Peter asserts that all prophecy in Scripture originated with God, not with the prophet. That is to say that not only the visions or dreams came from God but so did the prophets’ understanding of them. This seems to be the point of the next verse. College Press

   4. Summary

Introduction to Biblical Interpretation – 1

1. Presuppositions for Evangelical Biblical Interpretation
   1. The Bible as God’s Word (2 Tim. 3:16, 17; 2 Peter 1:20-21)
      1. IS the Word of God
      2. DOES NOT contain the words of God
      3. IS NOT words about God or where we experience God
      4. IS God’s communication to us using language that has the same essential meaning to God, the human author, and the reader/hearer
      5. ALL the Bible is the Word of God or in essence NONE of it is; if it is not God’s Word in its entirety, no human agent can definitively ascertain what is authentically from God and what is “only” from man.
   2. The Interpreter Must be Born Again (1 Cor. 2:6-16)
      1. Scripture contains both factual/historical information and spiritual teaching.
      2. Factual information contained in Scripture can be understood by anyone.
      3. The full significance of even the factual information can only be comprehended by the “spiritual man”.
      4. Spiritual teaching and significance of historical facts/events can not be understood by the unsaved person.
   3. The Interpreter Must be Guided by the Spirit (also John 16:12-15)
      1. God is comprehensible only to the extent he reveals himself.
      2. God’s truth is comprehensible only to the extent he provides understanding.
      3. Proper interpretation of both of God’s books (natural and special revelation) is possible only with the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
2. The Nature of the Bible: Unity & Diversity
   1. A Diverse Collection of Literary Works
      1. We must adapt methodology for various kinds of literature. (John 18:10,11; Rev. 1:16)
         1. The same method cannot be rigidly applied without regard for genre; a parable or a poem cannot be interpreted using the same specific rules as historic narrative.
         2. Recognition must be given to the fact that writings from Abraham’s culture will differ from that of Paul.
      2. We must recognize the progress of revelation. (Gen. 3:15; Deut. 18:15; Isa. 9:6, 53:3-9; Matt. 20:17-19)
         1. God did not reveal the full scope of his redemptive plan to Adam and Eve.
         2. Much of God’s early teaching about redemption came in pictures – e.g., the Old Testament system of worship including animal sacrifice.
         3. The identity of the Redeemer as God-Man, Prophet-Priest-King, Suffering Servant-Conquering King was revealed gradually from the Fall until the close of the canon.
      3. We must allow the biblical writers to speak for themselves, and then seek an internal unity behind their diverse expressions of faith. (Rom. 4:13-16; Eph. 2:8-10; James 2:14-26)
         1. In the event of the appearance of contradiction, if Presupposition I.A is correct, then an adequate explanation of the difficulty exists. The Bible student may be able to determine the solution or he may not; in either case, the Bible is still the infallible inerrant Word of God.
         2. The full context should be studied (the entire book, if necessary) in order to understand the meaning of the immediate passage in light of the surrounding text.
         3. The “final” interpretation must be consistent with what Scripture as a whole teaches.
      4. Biblical Theology

         As opposed to Systematic Theology, Biblical Theology asks the question of what a particular book, or group of books, teach on different topics, showing emphases of the different parts of Scripture. Dr. Miles Van Pelt

         Biblical theology gives special attention to the teachings of individual authors and sections of Scripture, and to the place of each teaching in the historical development of Scripture. …Biblical theology traces the historical development of a doctrine and the way in which one’s place at some point in that historical development affects one’s understanding and application of that particular doctrine. Biblical theology also focuses on the understanding of each doctrine that the biblical authors and their original hearers or readers possessed. Grudem, Systematic

   2. A Unity of Theme: The story of creation, fall and redemption
      1. The Bible is One Story. (Gen. 1-3; Rom. 5:12-19)
         1. The Bible’s view of itself is such that rejection of one part destroys the rest.
         2. Creation is presented as historical fact throughout Scripture. To deny the historicity of Genesis 1-9 makes Swiss cheese of the remainder of the Bible.
      2. A “Systematic Theology” becomes a possibility.

         Systematic theology is that methodological study of the Bible that views the Holy Scriptures as a completed revelation, in distinction from the disciplines of Old Testament theology, New Testament theology, and biblical theology, which approach the Scriptures as an unfolding revelation. Accordingly, the systematic theologian, viewing the Scriptures as a completed revelation, seeks to understand holistically the plan, purpose, and didactic intention of the divine mind revealed in Holy Scripture, and to arrange that plan, purpose, and didactic intention in orderly and coherent fashion as articles of the Christian faith. Robert Reymond, Systematic

Fearing God, Saving Lives

Exodus 1:12-21

September 15, 2005 New England Journal of Medicine, article regarding China’s policy for family size, The Effect of China’s One-Child Family Policy after 25 Years, says the following:

“The use of these long-term methods (sterilization) keeps abortion rates relatively low, with 25 percent of women of reproductive age having had at least one abortion, as compared with 43 percent in the United States.”

Regarding the “sex ratio”:

“The picture that emerges is that some urban Chinese make the choice to perform sex selection with the first pregnancy, since they are allowed only one child. In rural areas, most couples are permitted to have a second child, especially if the first is female. So if the second (or subsequent) child is female, the pregnancy often “disappears,” allowing the couple to have another child in an attempt to have a son. What happens to all the missing girls is a matter of speculation. Sex-selective abortion after ultrasonography undoubtedly accounts for a large proportion of the decline in female births. Actual figures are impossible to obtain, because sex-selective abortion is illegal but is known to be widely carried out, helped by a burgeoning private sector.”

A. The King

1. his problem

a. dread and loathing of the Jews v. 12

b. according to the psalmist God turned the hearts of the Egyptians to “hate” his people Psalm 105:24-25

It expresses an emotional attitude toward persons and things which are opposed, detested, despised and with which one wishes to have no contact or relationship. It is therefore the opposite of love. Whereas love draws and unites, hate separates and keeps distant. The hated and hating persons are considered foes or enemies and are considered odious, utterly unappealing. TWOT

c. fear – he basically feared losing control because he feared man v. 9-10

2. his response

a. oppression and brutality v. 13-14

b. infanticide v. 16

B. The Midwives

1. their problem

a. ethical dilemma v. 17

i. obey God (do what is right regarding life issues) – obey the king (do what is right regarding submission to governing authorities); which authority??

b. potential serious consequences

i. loss of job

ii. loss of life

iii. loss of respect in the community

2. their response

a. fear God, not the king v. 17 & 21

b. do what is right

c. go against the popular tide

C. God

1. his position

a. life is precious

i. made in the image of God Gen 1:26-27; 9:6

b. life begins before birth

i. seen in law Exodus 21:22-25

ii. reflected in God’s knowledge Jeremiah 1:5; Psalm 139:16

2. his response

a. good to those who fear him v. 20

b. bless those who obey him v. 21

c. is mightier than the most powerful of kings Exodus 14:26-31

D. Us

1. our position

a. God is a good Father

b. He has bestowed life-changing grace on his children

c. He deserves our love and obedience

2. our response

a. do what is right because we love God Ecclesiastes 12:13; John 14:15

b. do what is right when it is not popular

So the midwives, because they “feared God,” disobeyed the king. No doubt the lesson is to be applied with caution. We are not to be always flying in the face of authority, and claiming it as a merit. More especially, in States calling themselves Christian and retaining even partially a Christian character, opposition to the law is a serious matter, and, if resorted to, should only be resorted to under a clear and distinct conviction that the Divine law and the human are in absolute opposition. “Whatsoever is not of faith, is sin.” If we are not sure of the Divine obligation we must accept the human one. Pulpit Commentary

c. find creative and useful ways to be agents of mercy

“Laws against abortion assisted the pro-life movement but were not its primary focus of attention. Beginning with Connecticut in 1821, state after state passed laws against abortion, with exceptions to save the life of the mother; by the 1870s, every state had such laws, but they were largely ignored, as The New York Times noted in a biblically referenced editorial titled “The Least of These Little Ones.” Editor Louis Jennings, a conservative Christian, complained in 1871 that the “perpetration of infant murder . . . is rank and smells to heaven. Why is there no hint of its punishment?”

…organizations established shelters for the pregnant and unmarried. New York City had dozens of helping agencies… [u]nmarried pregnant women had at least 20 options for lodging, help, and training. …These groups asked women contemplating a quick fix to think about adoption instead, and to compare their own months of trouble with the years of good life that their children could have. …In smaller cities as well, pro-life forces made adoption a priority. …Pro-lifers could not do much about the low wages characteristic in entry-level jobs at the time, but they reduced the cost of living and increased safety by setting up networks of family-style lodging houses and inexpensive, YWCA-type boarding houses. …To women already deep into prostitution, opponents of abortion spoke of repentance and forgiveness. Evangelists such as Dwight Moody made sure they had the names and addresses of families willing to provide a spare room in their homes to young prostitutes who found themselves pregnant and chose to leave the trade.

…Even though convictions were rare, law was not entirely useless. Anti-abortion statutes did send a message of right and wrong. They forced abortionists to advertise in code, bribe policemen and politicians, and hire lawyers. Law could not end abortion but it could reduce the butcher’s bill, just as laws against drunken driving today cannot end the practice but can save lives. Today, it’s still worthwhile to pass laws restricting abortion, but time and money spent on providing and promoting compassionate alternatives saves more lives. — Marvin Olasky” (January 17, 2009, World Magazine) http://www.worldmag.com/articles/14857

d. remember where the real battlefield is

“Moses relates the contest between the mercy of God and the cruelty of the king of Egypt. When, therefore, the wretched Israelites were tyrannically afflicted, he says that God came to their aid, and so powerfully that his interference was successful. Thus was that wicked and deceitful design frustrated, which the Egyptians had set on foot for destroying the Church. Thence may we, too, conceive the hope, that whatsoever the wicked imagine against us will come to nought, because God’s hand is greater, and shall prevail. But we must bear afflictions patiently, because he would have us struggle against, and rise under the weight imposed upon us; and because we know that it is the peculiar office of God to oppose himself to unjust counsels, in order that they may not succeed, let us learn to abstain from all deceit and violence, lest we wantonly provoke God. But this passage is especially intended to console the believer, that he may be prepared to take up his cross more patiently; since God is sufficient to supply the help, to which the wrath of the wicked must finally yield.” Calvin on Exodus 1:12

Tabernacle – Completion and Setup

Exo 39:32-43 Exo 40:1-38

See also Leviticus 8 and 9, Numbers 7 thru 9

A. Inspection Exo. 39:32-43

1. components brought to Moses in “kit form” along with consumable supplies

2. only the lampstand was assembled

the lamps “set in order” or arranged

3. inspected and examined by Moses

“The one thing that counted in that inspection, was going by the pattern. No departure from it was allowed by God. He gave skill and wisdom to Bezaleel to carry out a divinely-given plan, and the blessing was the reward for keeping close to it. So will it be in the day of the Judgment Seat of Christ. It will not be “Well done, good and successful servant,” but “good and faithful servant.”

If God was so particular that Moses should make everything “according to the pattern” when it was the Tabernacle, which was only the shadow, will He be less so when it is the Church, which is the reality? Surely not! Yet how many Christians seem to regard it as a matter of indifference whether or not they go by the Word of God as to their worship and service.” William J. McClure, Tabernacle Types and Teachings

4. finished components corresponded to divine instruction

demonstrates the effectiveness of God’s equipping those involved with manufacture Exo. 31:1-11

B. Assembly and Setup Exo. 40:1-8 Exo. 40:16-33

1. credited to Moses; just as Bezaleel and Aholiab had help, so Moses must have also

2. commenced on New Year’s Day, year 2 of the Exodus (see v. 2 & 17)

3. the tabernacle tent with its walls first, then furnishings and veils/screens from the inside out

4. followed by furnishings of the outer court after which the curtain and gate defining the courtyard were erected

5. included first actual use

a. lighting the lamps, burning incense, offering burnt and grain offerings, setting up and filling the laver with water (see v. 25, 27 & 29)

b. not all on the first day; again, Moses’ function may have been limited to instruction and oversight, not actual performance of duties

i. nothing would have been used until after its consecration/anointing v. 9

C. Consecration Exo. 40:9-15

1. instructions given

a. for the priests – Exo 28:41; 29:1-35; 40:12-15

b. the tabernacle and contents – Exo 29:36-37; 40:9-11

2. instructions followed

a. for the tabernacle and contents – implied in Exo. 40:33; declared in Lev. 8:10-11 & Num. 7:1

b. for Aaron and his sons – Lev. 8

3. related but significantly different ritual followed immediately for the Levites Num. 8:5-22

a. Levite duties enumerated in Num. 4:1-33

4. week-long ritual for consecrating Aaron and his sons

a. tabernacle set up on New Year’s Day

b. consecration ritual followed for 7 days

i. could have commenced on New Year’s if the crew was large enough to erect the tabernacle in a short period of time

c. on the 8th (?) day of the year Aaron and his sons began their ministry Lev. 9:1-22

d. on the 14th day of the year Passover celebration began Num. 9:1-14

D. God’s Blessing Exo. 40:34-38

1. evidenced by

a. the cloud over the tent of meeting Exo. 40:34-35; Num. 9:15-16

b. God’s glory filling the tabernacle (see also Lev. 9:23)

c. fire that consumed the burnt offering Lev. 9:24

2. followed meticulous obedience to God’s command

a. 19 times from Ex. 38:22 on – they did it “just as the Lord commanded”

3. manifestation of God’s presence different from what Moses had previously experienced

a. burning bush Exo. 3:1-6

b. on the mountain Exo. 33:18-23; 34:5-7, 29-35

c. see other examples

4. fulfillment of God’s promise to dwell among his people Exo. 25:8; 29:45-46

a. indication of future blessing – Emmanuel, God with us Matt. 1:23

1. The tabernacle of God will be with men, and he will dwell among them (Revelation 21:3-4). His glory will fill it. “The glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof” (Revelation 21:23).

2. This glory will be no longer unapproachable. We shall be able to endure the sight. “His servants shall serve him, and they shall see his face” (Revelation 22:3-4). We shall receive the Vision.

3. This, however, will only be when earthly conditions have been exchanged for heavenly. “This corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality” (1 Corinthians 15:53). Till that hour arrives, we must be content to “walk by faith, not by sight” (2 Corinthians 5:7), seeing only “as through a glass darkly” (1 Corinthians 13:12). Pulpit Commentary

For seeing that God dwells in light that is inaccessible, Christ must intervene. Hence he calls himself “the light of the world;” and in another passage, “the way, the truth, and the life.” None cometh to the Father (who is the fountain of life) except by him; for “no man knoweth who the Father is but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him.” For this reason, Paul declares, “I count all things as loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord.” …Paul further declares, that in the person of Christ the glory of God is visibly manifested to us, or, which is the same thing, we have “the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.” (1Ti 6:16; John 8:12; 14:6; Luke 10:22; 1Cor 2:2; Acts 20:21; 26:17,18; 2Cor 4:6) It is true, indeed, that faith has respect to God only; but to this we should add, that it acknowledges Jesus Christ whom he has sent. God would remain far off, concealed from us, were we not irradiated by the brightness of Christ. All that the Father had, he deposited with his only begotten Son, in order that he might manifest himself in him, and thus by the communication of blessings express the true image of his glory. Since, as has been said, we must be led by the Spirit, and thus stimulated to seek Christ, so must we also remember that the invisible Father is to be sought nowhere but in this image. For which reason Augustine treating of the object of faith, (De Civitate Dei, lib. 11, ch. 2), elegantly says, “The thing to be known is, whither we are to go, and by what way;” and immediately after infers, that “the surest way to avoid all errors is to know him who is both God and man. It is to God we tend, and it is by man we go, and both of these are found only in Christ.” Calvin, Institutes, III.2.i

Order of Inspection Exo. 39:33-41

Order of Assembly Exo. 40:18-33

tent clasps planks crossbars posts bases ram skin covering manatee skin covering veil ark with poles and atoning cover table, utensils, and Presence bread lampstand, lamps, utensils, and oil golden altar anointing oil incense tabernacle door (screen) brazen altar, grate, poles, and utensils laver and stand courtyard hangings, posts and bases courtyard gate, ropes, and tent pegs miscellaneous equipment priestly garments

bases planks crossbars posts tent coverings contents of the ark poles for the ark atoning cover veil table and bread lampstand and lamps golden altar with incense tabernacle door brazen altar and offerings laver and stand courtyard hangings courtyard gate

The Tabernacle – The Laver

Exo 30:17-21 Exo 38:8

A. Its construction

1. bronze basin and (separate) stand or base v. 18

2. source material Exo 38:8

a. polished bronze mirrors

b. given by devout women

“It is very instructive to observe that the laver was formed of the brazen mirrors of the women assembling at the door of the tabernacle. Thus they were changed to their exactly opposite use. From being positioned between the brazen altar and tabernacle door instruments for self-admiration, and thus contributing to the gratification of the flesh, they were made into a laver, which reminded them of their pollution and their need of washing. Naturally the heart loves to see itself. Spiritually it loathes itself. The soul that sees itself in the mirror of God s law (Jas. i. 3-5) must feel its need of the laver.” Frederick Whitfield, Tabernacle Priesthood and Offerings

3. size, shape, capacity and design are not specified

a. capacity sufficient for Aaron and his sons only?

b. water would have been taken from the basin using pitchers or let out into the base through spigots

necessary to retain purity of water in the laver
“eastern” tradition to wash in running water whenever possible

The Orientals, we know, dislike exceedingly, to wash in a basin after our manner, in which the water, with which we commence washing is clearer than that with which we finish. They always prefer to wash at a falling stream, where each successive affusion is of clean water. We incline therefore to think, that the priests either washed themselves with the stream, as it fell from the spouts into the base, or else received in proper vessels so much water as was needed for the occasion. Newton, Tabernacle Furniture

c. probably much smaller than the temple laver (brazen sea)

12-15,000 gallon capacity – 15 foot diameter sphere 1 Kings 7:23
tabernacle laver would need to be portable

B. Its use

1. washing hands and feet v. 20 & 21

a. before entering the Holy Place

b. before approaching the altar to offer sacrifices

c. placement served as regular reminder

2. failure would result in death

a. no biblical record of the ordinance being violated

C. Its significance

1. of great importance – repeated warning v. 20 & 21

2. blood signifies redemption, water signifies purification Lev. 17:11

3. purity essential for one who would serve God or enter His presence –

“Be holy, for I am holy”; Lev. 11:44-45; 19:2; etc.

“You cannot see my face; for no man shall see me, and live” Ex. 33:20

4. repetition implies ongoing need

5. feet and hands only (along with repetition) points to sanctification John 13:6-10 Ephesians 5:25-26;

a. justification takes place at the brazen altar and atonement cover – blood

b. sanctification takes place at the laver – water

On the other hand, the outer cleansing of the body was nothing more than a symbol ot the inner cleansing of the heart. (And as the entire nation was accepted or rejected in the persons of the officiating priesthood, the pious in Israel were ever led to exclaim, “Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord, or who shall stand in his holy place ? He that hath clean hands and a pure heart” (Ps. xxiv. 3-4). Adams, The Mosaic Tabernacle

6. omission of dimensions

These [omissions] were two in number, and very noticeable they are. First, no dimensions were prescribed for the Laver, nor are we told the quantity of water which it contained. A similar omission was observed in connection with the lampstand. The measurements of all the other vessels are given. The absence of any here in connection with the Laver and its water plainly denotes that an unlimited provision has been made by God for our cleansing. In Christ and His Word is sufficient to minister to our every need. Pink, Gleanings in Exodus

D. Summary

At the very entrance to the court the three grand truths of the gospel of Christ were forced upon the Israelites attention.

1. The gate spoke of Christ : “I am the door: by Me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.” John 10:9

2. The brazen altar spoke of Christ : “without shedding of blood is no remission of sins.” Lev. 17:11; Heb. 9:22

3. The laver spoke of Christ : “if I wash thee not, thou hast no part with Me” John 13:8; “except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” John 3:5 Whitfield, Ibid.

“All that we have hitherto said of Christ leads to this one result, that condemned, dead, and lost in ourselves, we must in him seek righteousness, deliverance, life and salvation, as we are taught by the celebrated words of Peter, “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved,” (Acts 4: 12). The name of Jesus was not given him at random, or fortuitously, or by the will of man, but was brought from heaven by an angel, as the herald of the supreme decree[1]; the reason also being added, “for he shall save his people from their sins,” (Mat 1: 21). In these words attention should be paid to what we have elsewhere observed, that the office of Redeemer was assigned him in order that he might be our Saviour. Still, however, redemption would be defective if it did not conduct us by an uninterrupted progression to the final goal of safety. Therefore, the moment we turn aside from him in the minutest degree, salvation, which resides entirely in him, gradually disappears; so that all who do not rest in him voluntarily deprive themselves of all grace.” Calvin, Institutes, II.16.1

The Tabernacle – The Golden Altar

Exo 30:1-10 Exo 30:34-38 Exo 37:25-29

A. Its Construction

1. 18″ x 18″ x 36″

2. acacia wood overlaid with gold

3. a horn at each of the four corners similar to the brazen altar

4. a gold molding around the top

5. rings for the carrying poles

6. carrying poles of acacia wood overlaid with gold

B. Its Use

1. Set up immediately in front of the veil

2. incense to be burned morning and evening

3. to be used only for burning incense

4. purified yearly on the Day of Atonement

5. “fired” with coals from the brazen altar – Lev 16:12-13 and Num 16:46

6. ritual – see Smith’s Bible Dictionary

C. The Incense

1. made of fragrant spices

a. stacte

sap or gum resin, collected perhaps from a balsam; also thought to be a form of myrrh or cinnamon

b. onycha

probably from the operculum of a gastropod (conch); the part attached to the foot of the mollusk that closes the shell

c. galbanum

gum resin from the stem of a plant, perhaps parsley family or fennel

d. frankincense

gum resin from a flowering shrub native to Arabia

e. seasoned with salt

2. a sacred formula

a. not secret but reserved for holy use

3. preparation assigned to Eleazar, son of high priest Aaron, along with lamp and anointing oils Num 4:16

D. Its Significance

1. The coals

a. intimately connected with sacrifice

2. The incense Rev. 8:1-4

[Of what was the incense of the Tabernacle symbolic? In seeking an answer to this question, it should be remembered that it was compounded of the most precious spices, that in its normal condition it was most holy (Ex. xxx. 34-30), but at the same time inefficacious for its peculiar uses until consumed by fire from the altar of burnt-offering; thus consumed, however, it was that without which the High Priest could not enter the Holy of Holies to offer the blood of the Atonement (Lev. xvi. 12-14), and with which every morning and evening was sanctified (Ex. xxx. 7-9). What can it symbolize but the excellencies of the God-man, most holy in their normal condition, but made effluent (to flow out) and efficacious for atonement and sanctification only by fire from the Altar of Sacrifice? E. R. Craven] J. P. Lange on Revelation 8:3

a. given to the angel in large quantity

b. accompanied the prayers of the saints

3. inseparable from worship

a. perpetually Exo 30:8 (see Ryken, Biblical Imagery)

b. continues in heaven (?) Rev. 8:1-4

c. two-fold symbolism

i. the prayers of the saints

ii. the intercession of Christ in his mediatorial office

“a priest forever” Heb 7:17

that which makes their prayers sweet-smelling (pleasing/acceptable to God)

“And the smoke of the incense with the prayers of the saints went up out of the hand of the angel before God.” The imperfections that were cleaving to the prayers of the saints were removed, symbolically, by the fragrant smoke, to make their intercessions, petitions, and praises ascend to God’s throne.” Hendriksen, NTC on Rev. 8

The Priestly Garments

Exo 28:1-43 Exo 39:1-31

A. The Garments v. 1-5

1. Their purpose v. 2-3, 40

a. for glory – kabod – also honor, dignity

b. for beauty – also splendour, glory

c. for consecration – dedicated to sacred use

A solemn recognition of the significance of an appointed official dress. It expresses that the office is not created or defined by the man himself Heb 5:4, but that he is invested with it according to prescribed institution. Barnes’ Notes

To consecrate him, i.e. to be an outward sign of my calling and consecration of him to my holy service. Matthew Poole

2. Specific items

a. The High Priest v. 4, 42-43

i. Breastplate, ephod, robe, tunic, turban, sash, linen trousers (undergarments)

b. “assistant” priests – Aaron’s sons v. 40-43

i. tunic, sash, turban, linen trousers (undergarments)

3. General materials

a. linen ( בּד : Bad ) and fine linen ( שׁשׁ ; Shesh )

b. gold for:

i. thread v. 5-8

ii. gemstone settings v. 11, 13, 20

iii. chains v. 14, 22

iv. rings v. 23-24, 26-28

v. bells v. 33-34

vi. half coronet v. 36-37

c. blue, purple and scarlet thread – probably wool – for:

i. the ephod v. 5-6

ii. the breastplate v. 15

iii. the robe (solid blue) v. 31ff

iv. the pomegranates v. 33

v. the sash v. 39 (implied since it is described as “embroidered” or “woven work”)

d. precious stones

i. shoulder pieces v. 12

ii. breastplate v. 17-21

4. order of attiring

a. linen trousers

b. tunic

c. robe

d. ephod

e. breastplate

f. sash

g. turban

B. The Ephod v. 6-14

fine linen embroidered with blue, purple, scarlet yarn and also hammered gold “wire”; see Exodus 39:3; the colors signifying, as in the tabernacle, the regal majesty of the savior king whom the priests served

two pieces, connected at the shoulder, with an attached waistband

connections at the shoulder served as settings for two onyx stones and also the breastplate

onyx stones:

one engraved with Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Dan, Naphtali;

the second with Gad, Asher, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph, and Benjamin

C. The Breastplate v. 15-30

same construction as the ephod

9″ x 9″ after it was folded double

attached to the ephod with braided gold “chains”

4 rows of gemstones in gold settings

stones of somewhat questionable identity – names have changed

suitable for engraving
arranged right to left – as Hebrew is read
individual/unique stone for each tribe

Urim and Thummim oo-reem’ toom-meem’

little known or able to be understood about these

The most we know is that in a way known to Aaron and his successors God made his will known to the Israelites by way of the high priest inquiring of God while wearing Urim and Thummin.

Purposes:

The burden of office rests upon the shoulder – see Isaiah 9:6; 22:22; the onyx stones would remind the priest that his office was to represent all the people before God, to bring their needs before God and take His response back to the people.

The onyx stones as well as the stones of the breastplate served as a reminder to God of the covenant relationship with His people and of the high priest’s office as intercessor. Both purposes precisely typify the office of Christ as King and Priest – bearing the weight of office as our King, bearing our names before the Father as ones for whom he has made satisfaction by His atonement.

D. The Robe v. 31-35

woven of blue yarn – signifying the heavenward focus and dignity of the office

sleeveless, with a reinforced “collar” to limit wear

blue, purple and scarlet pomegranates alternating with gold bells around the lower hem

The bells would serve to announce his entrance into and exit from the Most Holy Place – even the High Priest should not enter God’s presence unannounced; it would also signify to the people that he had lived to come out from God’s presence.

The pomegranates pointed to the Divine Law as sweet and delicious spiritual food (see Deut. 8:3)

E. The Turban, Tunic and Sash v. 36-39

introduced by the pure gold plate inscribed with “Holy to the Lord”

It is not without reason that this inscription is placed upon the priest’s forehead, that it may be conspicuous; for not only did God thus testify that the legal priesthood was approved of, and acceptable to Him, since He had consecrated it byHis word, but also that holiness was not to be sought elsewhere. These two things, then, are to be observed, — first, that the priesthood of His own appointment is pleasing to God, and so, that all others, however magnificently they may be spoken of, are abominable to Him, and rejected by Him; and secondly, that out of Christ we are all corrupt, and all our worship faulty; and however excellentour actions may seem, that they are still unclean and polluted. Thus, therefore, let all our senses remain fixed on the forehead of our sole and perpetual Priest, that we may know that from Him alone purity flows throughout the whole Church. John Calvin

the turban and tunic made from fine white linen, perhaps acquired from Egypt among the things given at the time of the Exodus.

the sash made from fine linen embroidered, probably, with the same color scheme as the robe – blue, purple and scarlet yarn accompanied by gold “thread”

were to serve as signs of the honor and dignity of priestly office

white would have indicated ritual purity pointing to God’s requirement of holiness – “Be holy, for I am holy” (Lev. 19:2; 20:7; 20:26; etc.); also, the purity credited to the forgiven sinner – “Though your sins be as scarlet, they will be as white as snow; though they are red as crimson, they will be like wool.” Isa. 1:18

F. Linen Trousers (Undergarments) v. 42-43

intended for modesty

They are particularly ordered, in their ministration, to wear linen breeches, Exo 28:42. This teaches us modesty and decency of garb and gesture at all times, especially in public worship. It also intimates what need our souls have of a covering, when we come before God, that the shame of their nakedness may not appear. Matthew Henry

The nature of the priestly office – ephod, breastplate & robe

The fitness of the priest for office – the plate, turban, tunic and trousers

Heb 5:1-10 Heb 7:11-28

The High Priest

human nature – “taken from men” Heb 5:1

appointed in service to God; called by God Heb 5:1, 4

serving on behalf of the people Heb 5:1

offering (non-bloody) gifts and (blood) sacrifices Heb 5:1
“The first word includes, as I think, various kinds of sacrifices, and is therefore a general term; but the second denotes especially the sacrifices of expiation. Still the meaning is, that the priest without a sacrifice is no peace-maker between God and man, for without a sacrifice sins are not atoned for, nor is the wrath of God pacified. Hence, whenever reconciliation between God and man takes place this pledge must ever necessarily precede. Thus we see that angels are by no means capable of obtaining for us God’s favor, because they have no sacrifice” John Calvin

empowered to act with moderation (μετριοπαθὴς) toward sinners; that is, not passionate (παθὴς) or apathetic (ἀπαθὴς) Heb 5:2

“That there was a close connection between the priesthood of Aaron and that of Christ is evident from the opening verse of our present passage. Having stated, “No man taketh this honor unto himself, but he that is called of God, as Aaron,” the apostle now adds, “So also Christ” (verse 5), or, “In like manner Christ.” Thus, unmistakably, a parallel is here drawn. As it was with the Levitical high priests in all things necessary to that office, so, in like manner, was it with the Christ. In verses 5-10 the same five things (personal sin excepted) predicated of Aaron and his successors were found in our great High Priest. That there were, also, dissimilarities was inevitable from the personal imperfections that appertained to Aaron and his descendants: had there been anything in Christ which corresponded to their blemishes and failures, He had been disqualified.” A. W. Pink, Hebrews

temporary Aaronic priesthood Heb 7:11, 23

need a better high priest Heb 7:26-28

we have one Heb 8:1-2

There’s always an element of frustration when I read the gospels. I read of these men who traveled with Jesus, who followed him month after month, who drank in nearly every word of his earthly ministry. And yet somehow they just did not get it. Somehow the full reality of who he was and what he would do escaped them. It was only in hindsight, only after all was unmistakably clear, only in the book of Acts, that they finally understood.

I’ve been reading Richard Ganz’s recent book Take Charge of Your Life and he offers a good perspective on this. Why did they not get it? Quite simply because they couldn’t! Here is what Rich says:

We look back at the disciples, and we wonder, “What in the world was wrong with them? How could they not get it?” The reality is quite the opposite. We should ask instead, “How could they get it?” It is impossible. It is beyond comprehension. The Old Covenant sacrifices, as powerful a pointer as they were, had a limited purpose. Their purpose was simply to show us how even the most rational and beautiful picture of grace–a blood sacrifice for sin–falls flat in front of what Jesus actually did.

Jesus trained men who, because of their background, should have been ready for the great blood sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. They weren’t. They were still utterly incapable of “getting it” just from the facts. This is understandable. The ultimate fact is that it is absolutely impossible to come to an understanding of God’s grace just from an assessment of the facts.

There is nothing in human experience alone that can awaken a person to the full reality of God’s grace. What Jesus did for us, the grace that His life and death is for us, is eternally impossible to fully comprehend. The fact that people like us will live with God FOREVER is purely His gracious gift to us. Sadly, even though we know so much about grace, we continue to make obeying rules the high watermark of our lives, rather than grace.

The disciples did not catch on because the disciples could not catch on. Though they had so often seen the Old Covenant sacrifices, these were a mere shadow of what Christ accomplished. Though the sacrifices pointed to Jesus, they did so in a dim way. The simple facts were not enough to make the connection. It took a supernatural work for the disciples to understand.

This should be an encouragement to us as we seek to tell others about what Jesus has done. Though the facts are important–crucial even–they are not enough. For anyone to come to Jesus, to understand who he is and what he has done, requires a supernatural act of God. This was true of the disciples and it is true of all who believe.

http://www.challies.com/archives/articles/awakening-to-grace.php

The Tabernacle – Priestly Office & Garments

Exo 28:1-43 Exo 39:1-31

A. The Office

1. Primary priestly duties

• • watch over the fire on the Altar of Burnt Offering to keep it burning continually both by day and night, Lev 6:12; 2Ch 13:11

  • maintain the golden lamp outside the veil Exo 27:20-21; Lev 24:2

  • offer the morning and evening sacrifices, each accompanied with a meat offering and a drink offering, at the door of the Tabernacle. Exo 29:38-44

  • teach the children of Israel the statutes of the Lord. Lev 10:11; 2Ch 15:3; Eze 44:23-24

  • cover the Ark and all the vessels of the sanctuary, with a purple or scarlet cloth, before the Levites might approach them. Num 4:5-15

  • blow “an alarm” with long silver trumpets at the beginning of each day’s march Num 10:1-8

2. In addition to regular priestly duties, the high priest would also:

• • offer the regular meal offering (Lev 6:14; Lev 6:15).

  • share with the priests in the caring for the lamp that burned continually (Ex 27:21; Lev. 24:1-4)

  • assist in arranging the shewbread (Ex 25:30; Lev. 24:5-9)

  • officiate at the ceremony of the two goats, when one is sent into the wilderness to Azazel, and the other slain to make atonement for the sanctuary (Exod 30:10; Lev 16:8-10).

  • make atonement for the sins of the people, the priests and his own house (Lev 4:3; Lev 9:8; Lev 16:6; Num 15:25).

  • the high priest was to enter the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement (Lev 16:3; Lev 16:15; Lev 16:33; Lev 16:34).

  • act as mediator between Israel and God (Ex 28:29) when he carried the breastplate with the names of the tribes inscribed thereon

  • consult the Urim and Thummim before Yahweh (Nu 27:21).

It is supposed that there were in all eighty-three high priests, beginning with Aaron (1657 B.C.) and ending with Phannias (A.D. 70). At its first institution the office of high priest was held for life (but compare 1Ki 2:27), and was hereditary in the family of Aaron (Num 3:10). The office continued in the line of Eleazar, Aaron’s eldest son, for two hundred and ninety-six years, when it passed to Eli, the first of the line of Ithamar, who was the fourth son of Aaron. In this line it continued to Abiathar, whom Solomon deposed, and appointed Zadok, of the family of Eleazar, in his stead (1Ki 2:35), in which it remained till the time of the Captivity. After the Return, Joshua, the son of Josedek, of the family of Eleazar, was appointed to this office. After him the succession was changed from time to time under priestly or political influences. Easton’s Bible Dictionary

3. The high priest and his office prefigured Christ

The Aaronic priesthood described – Heb. 4:14ff

The superior priesthood identified – Heb. 4:14; 8:1-2

contrasted with the Aaronic priesthood – Heb. 8:5-6

B. The Garments v. 1-5

1. Their purpose v. 2-3, 40

a. for glory – kabod – also honor, dignity

b. for beauty – also splendour, glory

c. for consecration – dedicated to sacred use

A solemn recognition of the significance of an appointed official dress. It expresses that the office is not created or defined by the man himself Heb 5:4, but that he is invested with it according to prescribed institution. Barnes’ Notes

To consecrate him, i.e. to be an outward sign of my calling and consecration of him to my holy service. Matthew Poole

2. Specific items

a. The High Priest v. 4, 42-43

i. Breastplate, ephod, robe, tunic, turban, sash, linen trousers (undergarments)

b. “assistant” priests – Aaron’s sons v. 40-43

i. tunic, sash, turban, linen trousers (undergarments)

3. General materials

a. linen ( בּד : Bad ) and fine linen ( שׁשׁ ; Shesh )

b. gold for:

i. thread v. 5-8

ii. gemstone settings v. 11, 13, 20

iii. chains v. 14, 22

iv. rings v. 23-24, 26-28

v. bells v. 33-34

vi. half coronet v. 36-37

c. blue, purple and scarlet thread – probably wool – for:

i. the ephod v. 5-6

ii. the breastplate v. 15

iii. the robe (solid blue) v. 31ff

iv. the pomegranates v. 33

v. the sash v. 39 (implied since it is described as “embroidered” or “woven work”)

d. precious stones

i. shoulder pieces v. 12

ii. breastplate v. 17-21

4. order of attiring

a. linen trousers

b. tunic

c. robe

d. ephod

e. breastplate

f. sash

g. turban