← Back to sermon library

Leviticus chapter 27. Hopefully we'll start numbers 
next week, but usually it takes a bit of time to do some of the 
introductory material. So if not next Wednesday, God 
willing the following Wednesday, but Leviticus 27. I'll begin 
reading in verse 1. Now the Lord spoke to Moses, 
saying, Speak to the children of Israel and say to them, When 
a man consecrates by a vow certain persons to the Lord according 
to your valuation, if your valuation is of a male from twenty years 
old up to sixty years old, then your valuation shall be fifty 
shekels of silver according to the shekel of the sanctuary. 
If it is a female, then your valuation shall be 30 shekels. And if from five years old up 
to 20 years old, then your valuation for a male shall be 20 shekels, 
and for a female, 10 shekels. And if from a month old up to 
five years old, then your valuation for a male shall be five shekels 
of silver. And for a female, your valuation 
shall be three shekels of silver. And if from 60 years old and 
above, If it is a male, then your valuation shall be 15 shekels, 
and for a female, 10 shekels. But if he is too poor to pay 
your valuation, then he shall present himself before the priest, 
and the priest shall set a value for him according to the ability 
of him who vowed. The priest shall value him. If 
it is an animal that men may bring as an offering to the Lord, 
all that anyone gives to the Lord shall be holy. He shall 
not substitute it or exchange it, good for bad or bad for good. And if he at all exchanges animal 
for animal, then both it and the one exchanged for it shall 
be holy. If it is an unclean animal which 
they do not offer as a sacrifice to the Lord, then he shall present 
the animal before the priest, and the priest shall set a value 
for it, whether it is good or bad, as you, the priest, value 
it, so it shall be. But if he wants at all to redeem 
it, then he must add one-fifth to your valuation. And when a 
man dedicates his house to be holy to the Lord, then the priest 
shall set a value for it, whether it is good or bad, as the priest 
values it, so it shall stand. If he who dedicated it wants 
to redeem his house, then he must add one-fifth of the money 
of your valuation to it, and it shall be his. If a man dedicates 
to the Lord part of a field of his possession, then your valuation 
shall be according to the seed for it. A homer of barley seed 
shall be valued at 50 shekels of silver. If he dedicates his 
field from the year of Jubilee, according to your valuation, 
it shall stand. But if he dedicates his field 
after the Jubilee, then the priest shall reckon to him the money 
due according to the years that remain till the year of Jubilee, 
and it shall be deducted from your valuation. And if he who 
dedicates the field ever wishes to redeem it, then he must add 
one-fifth of the money of your valuation to it, and it shall 
belong to him. But if he does not want to redeem 
the field, or if he has sold the field to another man, it 
shall not be redeemed anymore. But the field, when it is released 
in the jubilee, shall be holy to the Lord, as a devoted field. 
It shall be the possession of the priest. And if a man dedicates 
to the Lord a field which he has bought, which is not the 
field of his possession, then the priest shall reckon to him 
the worth of your valuation up to the year of Jubilee, and he 
shall give your valuation on that day as a holy offering to 
the Lord. In the year of Jubilee, the field 
shall return to him from whom it was bought, to the one who 
owned the land as a possession. And all your valuations shall 
be according to the shekel of the sanctuary, 20 geras to the 
shekel. But the firstborn of the animals, 
which should be the Lord's firstborn, no man shall dedicate. Whether 
it is an ox or sheep, it is the Lord's. And if it is an unclean 
animal, then he shall redeem it according to your valuation, 
and shall add one-fifth to it. Or if it is not redeemed, then 
it shall be sold according to your valuation. Nevertheless, 
no devoted offering that a man may devote to the Lord of all 
that he has, both man and beast, or the field of his possession, 
shall be sold or redeemed. Every devoted offering is most 
holy to the Lord. "'No person under the ban, "'who 
may become doomed to destruction among men, "'shall be redeemed, 
but shall surely be put to death. "'And all the tithe of the land, 
"'whether of the seed of the land, "'or of the fruit of the 
tree, is the Lord's. "'It is holy to the Lord. "'If 
a man wants at all to redeem any of his tithes, "'he shall 
add one-fifth to it. "'And concerning the tithe of 
the herd or the flock, "'of whatever passes under the rod, "'the tenth 
one shall be holy to the Lord. He shall not inquire whether 
it is good or bad, nor shall he exchange it. And if he exchanges 
it at all, then both it and the one exchanged for it shall be 
holy. It shall not be redeemed. These are the commandments which 
the Lord commanded Moses for the children of Israel on Mount 
Sinai. Amen. As I pointed out many times 
in our studies, I am not Rabbi Butler. There are some details 
and things that escape me when it comes to the book of Leviticus. 
And chapter 27, for the most part, is one of those. Actually, 
I think I got somewhat of an understanding. but it is a bit 
of a difficult chapter and we're not going to deal with every 
jot and tittle. But just by way of a bit of an 
overview, it deals with persons who make vows to the Lord and 
then who are going to renege on that. You might ask the question, 
well, if God has persons and moves them in such a way that 
they feel led to vow to the Lord, why would he build into the law 
a provision for them to break that vow to the Lord? Well, you 
see something parallel in other pieces of legislation. The legislation 
concerning divorce, for instance. Jesus says, from the beginning 
it was not so, but because of the hardness of your hearts, 
Moses permitted a bill of divorce to be written. So the idea being 
is that in a post-fall world, sometimes laws are given to help 
protect the innocent, and in this case, to help protect the 
weak. So persons would have this desire 
to devote certain things unto the Lord, perhaps rashly, perhaps 
unwisely, perhaps imprudently, and then get down that road and 
say, wait a minute, I can't pay this. And so basically that's 
what Leviticus chapter 27 speaks to. It speaks to that particular 
event where somebody makes a rash or even a rash vow and then there's 
improper vows dealt with toward the end of the chapter but a 
rash vow is condemned by God but there is this provision built 
into the law such that somebody is able to not get out of it 
but to redeem themselves from the obligations of that particular 
vow. Now when it comes to the book 
of Leviticus it would seem that chapter 26 would have been the 
place to end the book with that that list of blessings for obedience 
and the list of cursings for disobedience. Some have wondered 
about the placement of chapter 27 here. In fact, Wenham makes 
the observation that generally commentators offer a historical 
explanation for the chapter's position. Either that it comes 
here because this was the law that was revealed next at Sinai, 
which is the conservative view, or that it was a later addition 
to the holiness code in Leviticus 17 to 26, which is the liberal 
view. And then he indicates something 
that I think does have merit. In chapter 26, essentially you 
have God's vow to the children of Israel. If you go into the 
land and you do what you're supposed to, I vow to bless you. If you 
go into the land and you don't do what you're supposed to, then 
I vow to curse you. So chapter 26 is God's vow concerning 
the execution of the terms of the covenant. Chapter 27 then 
deals with man's vow in terms of his response to God with reference 
to religious devotion. Again, Wenham makes the observation. He says, throughout human history 
when men have found themselves in dire straits, they have prayed 
for deliverance and made vows to God. You see that even in 
scripture. Perhaps you've done that in your 
own life. pinned in a burning car, you say, Lord, if you get 
me out of this, then I'm sure I'll be at church every Sunday 
from here on out. And this is how you're to understand 
chapter 27. The things commanded here, the 
things rather treated here, are not governed by law. This is 
an expression of the religious zeal of the Israelite. Again, it may be imprudent, It 
may be unwise and it may be rash. And so this is a check built 
in to help sort of keep that person from ending up in a situation 
where he's broken a vow to God. So back to Wenham. Throughout 
human history, when men have found themselves in dire straits, 
they have prayed for deliverance and made vows to God, promising 
to do something for God if he rescued them. Vows are made in 
the heat of the moment. I think he's right here. Not 
all vows, but when it comes to something that you vow or swear 
to God, but you don't have the wherewithal to pay it, I would 
suggest that that is rash or that is a heat-of-the-moment 
decision. He says, in retrospect, when the crisis is over, they 
may well seem foolish and unnecessary, and the person who made the vow 
may be tempted to forget it or only fulfill it partially. Scripture 
includes a number of warnings about such an attitude. Perhaps 
this is what led Solomon to conclude with reference to vows, or at 
least state in Ecclesiastes 5, 4 and 5. When you make a vow 
to God, do not delay to pay it, for He has no pleasure in fools. 
Pay what you have vowed, better not to vow than to vow and not 
to pay. That's a good piece of wisdom 
right there, brethren. We do well to heed that. Proverbs 
20, 25, it is a snare for a man to devote rashly something as 
holy and afterward to reconsider his vows. So, good wisdom from 
Solomon concerning vows. Now, when it comes to vows, our 
confession of faith speaks to this particular subject. And 
I thought it would be good just to review it. In chapter 23, 
it's of lawful oaths and vows. And basically, there's a distinction 
between an oath and a vow. I think Waldron nails it. He 
says, vows are solemn promises made to the Lord. Oaths are solemn 
promises made before the Lord, but to men. The purpose of the 
oath is confirmation. The purpose of the vow is commitment. And so in this religious zeal, 
I commit to the Lord, I'm going to allot for him my son. I'm 
going to allot for him my animal. I'm going to allot for him my 
land. I'm going to allot for him my house. I'm going to devote 
it to him. I'm going to give it to him. 
But then once the heat cools down, you think, wait a minute, 
what have I done? And so this chapter is calculated 
to help head off at the pass that sort of lack of wisdom. So in our confession, it deals 
with the oath in paragraphs one to four. It deals with the nature 
of lawful oaths in paragraph one. A lawful oath is a part 
of religious worship. wherein the person swearing in 
truth, righteousness, and judgment solemnly calls God to witness 
what he swears and to judge him according to the truth or falseness 
thereof." Now, there are some that disregard the oath in this 
New Covenant era. They get upset at the concept 
that there are oaths or vows binding in the New Covenant. 
But there are. Now, we're not supposed to swear 
about everything. That's what Jesus condemns in 
the Sermon on the Mount when he says, let your yes be yes 
and your no, no. He is mitigating against that 
mindset each and every day. I swear on a stack of Bibles, 
I'll have dinner ready at five. I swear on a stack of Bibles 
that I'll be there at five. That's not the view there. The confession goes on to talk 
about when an oath is warranted. It says in paragraph 2, Yet, as in matter of wait and 
moment, that's when you use an oath. That's when you use a vow, 
in matter of wait and moment. So when you go into a courtroom 
and you're swearing at a criminal case, and the bailiff asks you 
to put your hand on the Bible and to swear to tell the truth, 
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God, 
that's a matter of wait and moment. You use it at that particular 
juncture. You don't use it when you tell 
your wife you're gonna be home at five. It goes on to say, why, 
or the reason for it, for confirmation of truth, for ending all strife, 
an oath is warranted by the word of God. So a lawful oath being 
imposed by lawful authority in such matters ought to be taken. So we aren't pacifists, we're 
not Anabaptists, we're not those who revile or recoil against 
the notion of oaths in matters of weight and moment. And then 
in terms of the solemnity, chapter 23, paragraph three, whosoever 
takes an oath warranted by the word of God ought duly to consider 
the weightiness of so solemn an act, and therein to avouch 
nothing but what he knoweth to be truth. For that by rash, false, 
and vain oaths, the Lord is provoked, and for them this land mourns. And then finally, it speaks concerning 
the sincerity of the oath. and oath is to be taken in the 
plain and common sense of the words without equivocation or 
mental reservation. Again, good stuff concerning 
the regulation of oaths. And then vows are dealt with 
in paragraph 5. It says, a vow which is not to 
be made to any creature but to God alone is to be made and performed 
with all religious care and faithfulness. Again, What is in view? It's 
this idea of entering in with reference to a promise to God 
and ending up at that point where we say, well, we can't pay it. 
We can't part with this person, this animal, this house, or this 
land. We can't do what we have said 
to do. So a vow which is not to be made 
to any creature, but to God alone, is to be made and performed with 
all religious care and faithfulness. And then it highlights negatively 
vows that must not be entered into. But popish monastical vows 
of perpetual single life, professed poverty, and regular obedience 
are so far from being degrees of higher perfection that they 
are superstitious and sinful snares in which no Christian 
may entangle himself. So again, the context in the 
17th century reformed confessions was always against a tyrannical 
state, but as well against the tyrannical Roman Catholic Church. 
So that's why they specify that. They condemn the use of those 
popish vows that commit one to a monastic view of life, to poverty, 
celibacy, the various things that are in vogue among the papists, 
which unfortunately, Protestants are starting to observe Lent. 
I mean, the Protestantism is now going toward Lent is just 
a sad situation. It's happening. It's probably 
happening in our town. So all that to say, this is the 
definition of a vow. This is what's happening here 
in Leviticus chapter 27. So that's the place of oaths 
and vows in religion, chapter 23. Secondly, the categories 
of vows in Leviticus 27. first there is an introduction 
again verse one now the Lord spoke to Moses this isn't Moses 
who came up with this this isn't Moses who you know sort of deliberate 
with himself when you know Moses what Moses well I think these 
people aren't going to fulfill their vows we got to have something 
in place a mechanism to deal with the week now God spoke through 
Moses understanding all too well because he's infinite, he's omniscient, 
he knows the weakness built into man, he knows the sinful propensity 
of man, and so he has put this into place to deal with that 
particular eventuality. So the first section deals with 
rash vows. verses 2 to 25. The second section then deals 
with improper vows in verses 26 to 33. Again, we're not going 
to do the math, we're not going to get into all the particular 
details, but just understand that there were rash vows that 
the children of Israel would make and not be able to pay. And so within this body of legislation, 
there was a way to pay out and to redeem themselves from being 
under that particular bondage of a broken vow. So you've got 
first vows, including persons and animals in verses two to 
13. The vows involving persons, there's different valuation placed 
on males and females and those who are older and those who are 
younger. And Robert Alter makes the observation, the system of 
valuation reflects the potential economic productivity of a person 
of the stipulated age bracket and gender. It's not based on, 
you know, a male at 30 is far more valuable inherently, essentially, 
you know, naturally than a woman is, than the woman is. No, it's based on economic productivity. Typically, a 30-year-old man 
is able to work harder than a 5-year-old girl. That might not hold true 
today, but that should be the way that it is. So it's based 
on economic productivity. So the system evaluation reflects 
the potential economic productivity of a person of the stipulated 
age bracket and gender. A male has greater potential 
for productivity than a female. A mature person, greater productivity 
than a child or than an aged person. It just makes simple 
sense and built into the legislation is the understanding that there 
are two genders. There's men and there's women. 
And men are built to work harder. And that may seem harsh and vicious 
and unkind and untoward, but that's the way God designed things. So you've got the vows involving 
persons, verses two to eight, the vows involving clean animals 
in verses nine to 10, the vows involving unclean animals in 
verses 11 to 13. And again, understand that none 
of these vows were regulated by the law. God didn't say you 
have to separate for me your third born son as a priest in 
the sanctuary. You have to give me this animal 
above and beyond the tide because that's what really devoted and 
zealous people do. None of this was that way. The 
issue is a vow probably driven by zeal and it was done rashly 
and with not a lot of consideration. And then in verses 14 to 24, 
you've got the dedication of houses and land. You see it throughout, 
it's to the Lord, to the Lord, to the Lord, to the Lord. So 
most likely it is born out of zeal. I want to do something 
above and beyond my tithe, my offering. I want to serve the 
Lord. Believe it or not, you've got to be wise, you've got to 
be prudent, you've got to count the cost, and that's what God 
is saying in this chapter. It's not endorsing the practice 
of breaking your vows and invoking this legislation. It's not given 
to it so that you will consider the vow with less weight and 
with less importance. This is given to underscore how 
important the vow really is. It highlights the weightiness 
involved, because if you don't think through these things, it's 
going to cost you. So you've got the dedication 
of houses, verses 14 to 15, and then the dedication of land in 
verses 16 to 24, and then the standard of payment. This is 
said a couple of times throughout. All the valuations, verse 25, 
shall be according to the shackle of the sanctuary, 20 geras to 
the shackle, an economic system built on objective money. There 
was hard currency involved and that's the standard by which 
they measured these things. So those would have been rash 
vows. I'm going to give my kid, I'm going to give my horse, I'm 
going to give my dog, I'm going to give my unclean animal, I'm 
going to give my clean animals, I'm going to give my house, and 
then not being able to pay it. So there was a method involved 
by which you could redeem yourself. But then the improper vows are 
verses 26 to 33. First, you have the firstborn 
animal. Notice in verses 26 and 27. The idea here is that this is 
governed by law. God already owns the firstborn 
animal. So you don't give God the firstborn 
animal and then say, oh, that's gonna be my vow to the Lord, 
my over and above. No, God already owns that according 
to Exodus 13 two and Exodus 13 11 to 16. So notice in verse 
26, for the firstborn of the animals, which should be the 
Lord's firstborn, no man shall dedicate, whether it is an ox 
or sheep, it is the Lord. It already belongs to him. You 
can't give to the Lord what already belongs to the Lord. And if it 
is an unclean animal, then he shall redeem it according to 
your valuation and shall add one fifth to it, of it, or if 
it is not redeemed, then it shall be sold according to your valuation. 
So the firstborn animal is an improper vow because it's already 
owned by God. The next category are things 
under the ban. The Old Testament or the Hebrew 
word for this is harem. And Haram spoke of things that 
were devoted to destruction. You see this concept in scripture. You see it in the mandate for 
holy war in Deuteronomy 7. The word may not be there, but 
the concept is, go in and utterly dispossess the land of all the 
Canaanites. Remember Joshua at Jericho, they 
were supposed to march around and not take any of the property. 
It was devoted to destruction. It was under the ban. And that's 
what caused their defeat at Ai. Remember Achen, he saw the things 
that were there and instead of leaving it under the ban or devoted 
to destruction, Achen grabbed some and he hid it under his 
tent. Well, as a result, they go to battle at Ai. They should 
have, you know, mopped it up really quickly and easily, but 
they lost. And so God calls out Achen and 
Achen confesses to it. Well, those things were devoted 
to destruction. Not in every instance. There were times when 
the children of Israel could go and conquer lands and take 
the spoil or take the booty. They could take all of the possessions. 
But there were other instances where the things were devoted 
to destruction. That harem principle applied. They were not to take 
it. First Samuel chapter 15. Saul 
is given instructions by Samuel to go against Agag and the Amalekites 
and God says go destroy agag destroy all the Amalekites Destroy 
their sheep destroy their cows destroy everything why because 
it was devoted to destruction. It was under the ban So what 
happens Saul doesn't do that and when he comes back to report 
to Samuel Saul says I've done everything the Lord commanded 
and Samuel says well, why am I hearing cows moo? Why am I 
hearing sheep? Why am I hearing things that 
should be under the ban? So there were things under the 
ban, and that's what verses 28 and 29 speak to. Nevertheless, 
no devoted offering that a man may devote to the Lord of all 
that he has, both man and beast, or the field of his possession, 
shall be sold or redeemed. Every devoted offering is most 
holy to the Lord. No person under the ban who may 
become doomed to destruction among men shall be redeemed, 
but shall surely be put to death. Wenham says banning or devoting 
was a more solemn and irreversible vow than ordinary dedication. Anyone or anything that was devoted 
to the Lord could not be ransomed. It was usual to invoke the ban 
in wars against the native inhabitants of Canaan. In divine judgment, 
all Israel's enemies and their property were devoted to the 
Lord. It could also be used as judicial sentence against idolaters. It seems unlikely that ordinary 
Israelites could pronounce such vows. Only the recognized leaders 
had authority to declare a death sentence. Now, interestingly, 
the New Testament counterpart to this concept of harem is anathema. You see that Greek word, or it's 
usually translated condemned or accursed. Well, it's the Greek 
word anathema that picks up that idea from harem, which means 
devoted to destruction. And Paul uses it in a few places. Romans 9, verse 3, he says, if 
he could be accursed, anathema from God for the sake of his 
own countrymen, he would take that. 1 Corinthians 12, nobody 
can say Jesus is anathema by the Spirit. 1 Corinthians 16, 
22. This is one of the reasons why 
I think the, you know, praying and singing the imprecatory Psalms 
of David, sometimes people say, well, that's not right. That's 
not Christian. That's not holy. 1 Corinthians 
16, 22. The apostle Paul says, if any 
man does not love the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema. 
Let him be damned to hell. Let him be doomed to destruction. 
Let him be devoted to destruction. In some sense, it makes the imprecatory 
Psalms of David look like a walk in the park. And then Galatians 
1, 8 and 9. The apostle says, if we or anyone 
else or an angel from heaven preached to you another gospel, 
let him be anathema. Let him be a curse. Let him be 
devoted to destruction. And then the tithes of the Lord, 
verses 30 to 33. Again, you cannot vow to the 
Lord what is His by law and right. So you can't say, well, you know, 
here's my tithe, but it's also my vow of devotion over and above 
to God. No, God already owns the tithes. So verses 30 to 33 would be an 
improper vow. And then verse 34 is a conclusion, 
probably of the chapter and of the book as a whole. These are 
the commandments which the Lord commanded Moses for the children 
of Israel on Mount Sinai. So in terms of its conclusion 
of the chapter, the chapter assumes that persons will want to freely 
give to the Lord. But the chapter is not encouraging 
you to do that necessarily. It's not an encouragement. Go 
out and vow to the Lord, because there's a provision built in, 
in case you're reneged, then there's a way you can sort of 
buy yourself out of the situation. No, again, all of this is calculated 
to show the gravity involved of vowing to the Lord, to cause 
one to think twice before he engages in that particular practice. Now in terms of the potential 
that the chapter addresses, making a vow rashly and then having 
to deal with the ramifications or the repercussions. So don't 
read the chapter again as a provision. Well, you can just go out and 
make a vow and then this is a way to buy yourself out of it. No, 
it addresses the potential of making a vow rashly and then 
having to deal with the negative repercussions. And then the danger 
not paying your vow. not paying your vow. The rules 
governed the one contemplating breaking the vow. The rules underscored 
the cost of breaking the vow. So it is a chapter that enforces 
the necessity that the children of Israel be like the God of 
Israel. The God of Israel who promises 
blessings and curses will make it come to pass. the children 
of Israel that promise God certain gifts or devotions, they must 
keep that vow. Now in terms of some basic application, 
I would suggest first the problem of popish monastical vows, like 
our confession states. This is no small thing. In fact, 
Colossians 2 is the proof text for that statement in the confession 
of faith. I think so. No, it's not. It 
could have been. Colossians chapter 2, if you 
look there specifically at verses 20 and following. Basically, 
Colossians 2 is a beware of false teachers chapter. Colossians 
2 highlights a warning against mystical legalism in verses 16 
to 19. And then there is a specific 
admonition against what's called asceticism. If you notice in 
2.20, therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles 
of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject 
yourselves to regulations? Do not touch, do not taste, do 
not handle, which all concern things which perish with the 
using. according to the commandments and doctrines of men. Now, if 
you choose not to touch things or to taste things or handle 
things as a personal preference, you know, for me, I just don't 
want to eat that. Okay. But if you think that's 
a commandment of men, like the Lenten practice of not eating 
fish or not eating meat on Friday, If you think that's religiously 
significant, Paul's condemning you here. Again, you may, in 
your diet, in your whatever regime, say, you know, for me, I don't 
want salad, so I'm just not going to eat salad. Well, that's different 
than saying God has commanded, some of us might wish that, that 
you aren't supposed to eat salads. See the difference there? This 
is what he's saying. Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle. 
We call this asceticism. Holiness by virtue of what we 
don't do. Holiness by virtue of what we 
restrain ourselves from. So he goes on to say in verse 
22, which all concern things which perish with the using according 
to the commandments and doctrines of men. But then look at what 
he says in terms of condemning this. These things, indeed, they 
have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false 
humility and neglect of the body. It appears holy. It appears godly. It appears righteous. Look at 
the holy man. Look at the righteous man. He 
never eats beef. What a godly specimen of a human 
being. He says, but they are of no value 
against the indulgence of the flesh. Popish monastical vows 
are garbage. Secondly, the problem of Protestant 
legalistic vows. Don't bind your conscience to 
well-meaning but dumb Bible teachers. Don't do that. Well, this particular 
man said you can never this. Well, does the Bible say you 
can never this? Well, not really. Then it's okay 
to do it. If God specifies that something 
is okay, no man is able to say, no, you're not supposed to do 
that. Look at first Timothy chapter four. It's an intriguing passage 
because when we hear doctrines of demons, what do we typically 
think of? We think of, you know, some singer 
dressed in red with Satan horns and blood pouring down. And we, 
oh, that's the doctrines of demons right there, baby. Look at 1 
Timothy 4.1. Now the Spirit expressly says 
that in latter times, some will depart from the faith, giving 
heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking 
lies and hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a 
hot iron, forbidding to marry and commit. So hang on, let me 
just stop there for a minute. If you just had verses one and 
two, what would you be waiting for? Child sacrifice? You'd be 
waiting for, you know, at least sacrifice of animals. You know, 
cutting up a dog and, you know, offering them up to Satan. I 
mean, these are bad things. Like, I listen to what he says 
here. Depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits, 
doctrines of demons, speaking lies and hypocrisy, having their 
own conscience seared with a hot iron. What do they do? Forbidding 
to marry. and commanding to abstain from 
foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by 
those who believe and know the truth. We may be immune from 
Popish monastical vows, but we may not be immune from Protestant 
monastical vows. If a pastor or teacher or anybody 
tells you something and the Bible doesn't legitimize that, then 
don't bind yourself to that sort of a thing. As well, the problem 
of pietistic circumventions of the law of God. Look at Matthew 
15. Matthew 15, pietistic circumventions 
of the law of God. I didn't know how better to say 
that. I'm sure there's probably a better way, but that just seemed 
to suggest itself. Actually, I was trying to go 
with some... alliteration, problem of pope-ish monastical vows, 
problem of protestant legalistic vows, problem of pietistic circumventions 
of the law of God, that's why. 15. 1. Then the scribes and pharisees 
who were from Jerusalem came to Jesus, saying, Why do your 
disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not 
wash their hands when they eat bread. He answered and said to 
them, why do you also transgress the commandment of God? Because 
of your tradition. For God commanded saying, honor 
your father and your mother, and he who curses father or mother, 
let him be put to death. But you say, whoever says to 
his father or mother, whatever profit you might have received 
from me as a gift to God, then he need not honor his father 
or mother. So basically these guys would take this that was 
supposed to be for their parents. It wasn't tithe. It wasn't law. It wasn't thou must give this 
to the sanctuary. This was a devotion. This was 
a vow. This was an over and above. So, 
you know, dad, mom, you're not gonna get, you know, the canned 
goods this month that you were gonna get because, you know, 
God laid it on my heart to give this money to the sanctuary. 
Corbett, it's a gift, give it. Well, that's all good and well, 
but if your parents are starving to death, you think God is pleased 
with your religious devotion? This is what Jesus is condemning 
there. And interestingly, who's he talking 
to? He's talking to the scribes and 
Pharisees. Huh. Did they have kickback from 
monies that was put into the temple? Money that was put into 
the sanctuary? You better believe they got kickbacks. 
This is probably like money laundering in a religious ecclesiastical 
context in the first century. Oh yeah, dad, mom, you're going 
to have to starve this month because the Lord laid it on my 
heart to give extra. And then he peels back some of 
that extra, he wins, they suffer, and then Jesus says, thus you 
have made the commandment of God but of no effect by your 
tradition. Hypocrites, well did Isaiah prophesy about you saying, 
these people draw near to me with their mouth and honor me 
with their lips, but their heart is far from me, and in vain they 
worship me. Notice again, teaching his doctrines 
the commandments of men. This idea of a man-made religious 
approach is condemned over and over and over again in scripture. 
If God lays it upon your heart to give over and above, just 
make sure that the people around you aren't starving. Make sure 
that you are fulfilling your obligations all around before 
you devote to God or give Corbin to God. And then as well, the 
problem of unprincipled and undisciplined zeal. Our brother at prayer meeting 
the other day read a section from J.C. Ryle on religious zeal. Now, religious zeal can be either 
good or bad, right? It has to be zeal according to 
knowledge. Phineas is commended by God for 
his zeal when he takes that spear and he shoves it through that 
Israelite, the Midianite woman. There's a zeal, however, that 
does not register in terms of righteousness and godliness. 
So if your zeal is operative in an unknowledgeable, or I would 
suggest an unprincipled and undisciplined way, then you're gonna end up 
with some big problems when you vow to God, and then you can't 
end up, or you end up not being able to pay it. Listen again 
to Solomon. When you make a vow to God, do 
not delay to pay it. for he has no pleasure in fools. 
Pay what you have vowed, better not to vow than to vow and not 
pay. So that's the conclusion of the 
chapter, the conclusion of the book. We have seen many things 
in the book of Leviticus. It ultimately resolves the tension 
that we see at the end of Exodus chapter 40. God's presence is 
in the tabernacle, but the children of Israel cannot approach. The 
book of Leviticus comes to resolve that tension. It answers the 
question, who can abide in your holy hill? It is the one who, 
by God's grace, comes through a bloody knife and a smoking 
altar. And then the book of Leviticus 
specifies not only the manner or the means by which we approach 
God, but the maintenance of that relationship with God. And of 
course, Leviticus points us very, very conspicuously to the person 
and the work of our Lord Jesus Christ. I would say the entirety 
of the book does that, specifically chapter 16, the day of atonement, 
and then chapters 21 and 22, the conduct of the priests. It speaks to how the priest is 
to be and how the sacrifice is to be, and Jesus fulfills both. Well, let us pray. Our God and 
Father, we thank you for this wonderful book of Leviticus. 
We thank you for the emphasis that we find on sacrifice and 
atonement and satisfaction for sin. We see as well the emphasis 
upon your holiness and your righteousness and your justice, and we see 
the goodness of your laws. We know, God, they're not given 
in this new covenant era for our salvation. But as saved men 
and women, we learn many wonderful things concerning who you are 
and what you require from your creatures. We pray now that you 
would go with us, watch over us and the rest of our church, 
bring us together on the Lord's day that we may worship you in 
spirit and in truth. And we pray through Christ the 
Lord, amen.