← Back to sermon library

Leviticus 21 for our meditation 
before the Lord's Supper. It's a bit of a long text. We're 
gonna read all of 21 and some of 22. Leviticus chapter 21, 
I'll read to the end of the chapter, then we'll skip to chapter 22 
and verse 17. Leviticus 21, beginning in verse 
one. And the Lord said to Moses, speak 
to the priests, the sons of Aaron, and say to them, none shall defile 
himself for the dead among his people, except for his relatives 
who are nearest to him, his mother, his father, his son, his daughter, 
and his brother. also his virgin sister who is 
near to him, who has had no husband, for he, or excuse me, for her 
he may defile himself. Otherwise he shall not defile 
himself, being a chief man among his people to profane himself. 
"'They shall not make any bald place on their heads, "'nor shall 
they shave the edges of their beards, "'nor make any cuttings 
in their flesh. "'They shall be holy to their 
God, "'and not profane the name of their God, "'for they offer 
the offerings of the Lord made by fire, "'and the bread of their 
God. "'Therefore, they shall be holy. 
"'They shall not take a wife who is a harlot, "'or a defiled 
woman, "'nor shall they take a woman divorced from her husband, 
"'for the priest is holy to his God. Therefore you shall consecrate 
him, for he offers the bread of your God. He shall be holy 
to you, for I, the Lord who sanctify you, am holy. The daughter of 
any priest, if she profanes herself by playing the harlot, she profanes 
her father. She shall be burned with fire. 
He who is the high priest among his brethren, on whose head the 
anointing oil was poured, and who is consecrated to wear the 
garments, shall not uncover his head nor tear his clothes. Nor 
shall he go near any dead body, nor defile himself for his father 
or his mother. Nor shall he go out of the sanctuary, 
nor profane the sanctuary of his God. For the consecration 
of the anointing oil of his God is upon him. I am the Lord. And 
he shall take a wife in her virginity, a widow, or a divorced woman, 
or a defiled woman, or a harlot. These he shall not marry, but 
he shall take a virgin of his own people as wife. Nor shall 
he profane his posterity among his people, for I the Lord sanctify 
him." And the Lord spoke to Moses saying, speak to Aaron saying, 
no man of your descendants in succeeding generations who has 
any defect may approach to offer the bread of his God. For any 
man who has a defect shall not approach, a man blind or lame, 
who has a marred face or any limb too long, a man who has 
a broken foot or broken hand or is a hunchback or a dwarf 
or a man who has a defect in his eye or eczema or scab or 
is a eunuch. "'No man of the descendants of 
Aaron the priest, "'who has a defect, shall come near to offer "'the 
offerings made by fire to the Lord. "'He has a defect, he shall 
not come near "'to offer the bread of his God. "'He may eat 
the bread of his God, "'both the most holy and the holy, "'only 
he shall not go near the veil "'or approach the altar, because 
he has a defect, "'lest he profane my sanctuaries, "'for I the Lord 
sanctify them. And Moses told it to Aaron and 
his sons and to all the children of Israel. So let's move over 
to chapter 22, verse 17. And the Lord spoke to Moses saying, 
speak to Aaron and his sons and to all the children of Israel 
and say to them, Whatever man of the house of Israel, or of 
the strangers in Israel, who offers his sacrifice for any 
of his vows, or for any of his freewill offerings, which they 
offer to the Lord as a burnt offering, you shall offer of 
your own freewill a male without blemish from the cattle, from 
the sheep, or from the goats. Whatever has a defect, you shall 
not offer, for it shall not be acceptable on your behalf. And 
whoever offers a sacrifice of a peace offering to the Lord 
to fulfill his vow, or a freewill offering from the cattle or the 
sheep, it must be perfect to be accepted. There shall be no 
defect in it. Those that are blind, or broken, 
or maimed, or have an ulcer, or eczema, or scabs, you shall 
not offer to the Lord, nor make an offering by fire of them on 
the altar to the Lord. Either a bull or a lamb that 
has any limb too long or too short, you may offer as a freewill 
offering, but for a vow it shall not be accepted. You shall not 
offer to the Lord what is bruised or crushed or torn or cut, nor 
shall you make any offering of them in your land. Nor from a 
foreigner's hand shall you offer any of these as the bread of 
your God, because their corruption is in them and defects are in 
them. They shall not be accepted on 
your behalf. And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, When a bull 
or a sheep or a goat is born, it shall be seven days with its 
mother, and from the eighth day and thereafter it shall be accepted 
as an offering made by fire to the Lord. Whether it is a cow 
or ewe, do not kill both her and her young on the same day. 
And when you offer a sacrifice of thanksgiving to the Lord, 
offer it of your own free will. On the same day, it shall be 
eaten. You shall leave none of it until morning. I am the Lord. 
Therefore you shall keep my commandments and perform them. I am the Lord. You shall not profane my holy 
name, but I will be hallowed among the children of Israel. 
I am the Lord who sanctifies you, who brought you out of the 
land of Egypt to be your God. I am the Lord. Amen. Well, let us pray. Our Father, 
we thank you for the reading of your word. We pray now for 
the ministry of the Holy Spirit as we consider these things in 
a typical significance and how they point us to that great High 
Priest and to that perfect Lamb of God. We thank you so very 
much that that sacrificial system, the blood of bulls and goats, 
which could never take away sin, nevertheless pointed to that 
one in whom there is forgiveness, that one in whom there is a righteousness 
to be had. We bless you and we praise you 
for the life, death, and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. And 
may we indeed celebrate those things tonight. And we ask in 
the name of Jesus Christ, our Lord, amen. Well, as we look 
at this particular chapter, it's in what's called the holiness 
code in the book of Leviticus. In chapter 10 of Leviticus in 
verses 10 and 11, we read that you may distinguish, this is 
the priest's task, that you may distinguish between holy and 
unholy and between unclean and clean, and that you may teach 
the children of Israel all the statutes which the Lord has spoken 
to them by the hand of Moses. And then essentially in terms 
of the book in its broadest outline, you have laws pertaining to cleanness, 
or excuse me, chapters one to 16 contain ritual regulations 
for public life and for worship. And then chapter 17 to 26, I 
mentioned are the holiness code, how Israel was to conduct themselves 
in their day in and day out activities. Now here specifically in chapters 
21 and 22, regulations concerning the priesthood, and concerning 
acceptable sacrifice. And again, this points us to 
our Lord Jesus Christ. I realize there's some challenging 
portions in this particular passage. As I was reading through it, 
I thought, perhaps this wasn't the best idea. I'm going to lean 
on a few men, especially when we get to the physical requirements 
of the priesthood. But that section I skipped is 
not unimportant, it just wasn't germane to our study tonight. So I'll give you the outline. 
I'll at least try and explain the function of that center section 
as we move along. But in the first place, in chapter 
21, verses 1 to 15, you have the practical restrictions concerning 
the priesthood. practical restrictions concerning 
the priesthood. Then secondly, in 21-16-24, the 
physical requirements of the priesthood. The physical requirements 
of the priesthood. Thirdly, that section I skipped 
in chapter 22, verses 1-16, the regulation concerning food for 
the priesthood. Remember the priests were not 
given their own lands. The priests were basically committed 
to the house of God and to the worship of God. So they lived 
based on the tithes and the offerings that were given. And so those 
are particular rules in terms of family members who could participate 
in that food. And then that last section, the 
fourth point is the physical requirements for sacrificial 
animals in chapter 22, verses 17 to 33. In short, the thesis is simple, 
that God through Moses is preaching Jesus Christ in Leviticus chapters 
21 and 22. We'll end tonight by looking 
at some of the book of Hebrews. And I've often thought that if 
you didn't have access to the book of Leviticus, it would be 
hard to navigate the book of Hebrews, because much of Hebrews, 
especially chapters 5, verse 1 to about chapter 10, verse 
18, is about the priestly office of our Lord Jesus Christ. Christ 
is superior to angels, Christ is superior to Joshua, Christ 
is superior to Moses, and of course, Christ is superior to 
Aaron, and his sons, and the entirety of the Levitical priesthood. So let's just jump in first to 
the practical restrictions concerning the priesthood in verses 1 to 
15. And essentially, there's two 
things going on here. First, the priests, the regular, 
normal, day-in, day-out priests, verses 1 to 9, and then the high 
priests in verses 10 to 15. And the prohibitions are quite 
simple. One deals with the act of mourning, 
and the other deals with the act of marriage. So with reference 
to the ordinary priests, mourning, verses 1 to 6, marriage, verses 
7 to 9. With the high priests, mourning, 
verses 10 to 12, and marriage, verses 13 to 15. And we might 
wonder why there are these strict prescriptions against the kinds 
of mourning that are associated with this particular sachet. 
Well, it's quite simple. If you look specifically at verse 
4, it says, otherwise he shall not defile himself being a chief 
man among his people to profane himself. As a chief man, he's 
not to profane himself so that he can continue on in the absolutely 
necessary duties of functioning as a priest. In fact, Gill says 
it this way, because he was a principal person among his people to officiate 
for them in sacred things, Wherefore, if he did not take care that 
he was not defiled for the dead, which might often happen, remember, 
lots of people died in the olden days, he would be frequently 
hindered from doing his office for the people, which would be 
attended with ill consequence to them, and therefore the above 
cases are only accepted, those that are closest to him, as being 
such that rarely happen. You see an instance of this when 
God kills Nadab and Abihu in chapter 10. Because God kills 
them, that doesn't stop worship. That doesn't stop what's happening 
in the house of God. There is an order given to drag 
the bodies out, but the priests are on duty. They have been anointed. 
There is a great body of people that depend upon their intercession 
and depend upon them offering up sacrifice. Now in verses five 
and six, this not making any bald place on their heads, it's 
not like the new haircut that I just got or the one that Andy 
sports, but rather it's probably pagan mourning rites. And it's 
already been addressed in Leviticus 19 at verses 27 and 28, and then 
Deuteronomy chapter 14 and verse one. But I think the main emphasis 
is specifically at verse 12, "...nor shall he go out of the 
sanctuary, nor profane the sanctuary of his God. For the consecration 
of the anointing oil of his God is upon him. I am the Lord." 
So the main emphasis in terms of the mourning rites is to make 
sure you donate the pagans and to make sure that it's only those 
closest to you. There isn't any other thing that 
should take you from your essential duty in terms of intercession 
and in terms of sacrifice. But then with reference, or not 
but, and with reference to marriage. Again, the prescriptions are 
given specifically to the priests, verses seven to nine, and then 
to the high priests, in verses 13 to 15. Not a lot of differences 
there, though there are a couple of things that we ought to observe. 
Notice in verse 7, with reference to the ordinary priest, they 
shall not take a wife who is a harlot or a defiled woman, 
nor shall they take a woman divorced from her husband, for the priest 
is holy to his God. It's interesting. They are specifically 
prohibited from marrying a divorcee, which I think assumes that it 
was lawful and that it was going on that divorcees did remarry. In fact, I think this is an emphasis 
as well in Deuteronomy chapter 24, verses 1 to 4. Now the priest, 
the ordinary priest, neither the high priest could marry a 
divorced woman. But the garden variety Israelite 
could. God's law teaches that if divorce 
is lawful, and in the New Testament we see the two specific instances, 
sexual immorality and desertion. I would categorize spousal abuse 
as an act of desertion as well. 1 Corinthians 7 deals with desertion, 
Matthew 19 deals with porneia or sexual immorality. And it's 
a much broader term than simply adultery. But those are two lawful 
reasons why the innocent party may sue out for divorce. And 
if the divorce is sanctioned by God, then remarriage is permitted. Now, I realize that is a controversial 
statement. I preached at length on it when 
we went through Matthew 19, but this is definitely a compelling 
text. The priest could not marry a 
divorced woman. but the non-priest could marry 
a divorced woman. And again, the emphasis here 
is on purity and not being profane. Not that the normal Israelite 
is somehow impure because he married a divorced woman, but 
the priest of God functioning in the house of God, in the constant 
service of God must be unique. And that's what separates them 
from the garden variety Israelite. So that's the practical restrictions 
concerning priesthood. Mourning and marriage, those 
things aren't to be associated, obviously. Mourning is not always 
the case of a good marriage. Good marriages don't promote 
mourning. Good marriages promote happiness and joy. So, mourning 
and marriage disconnected. Make sure you don't think that 
those two are sort of combined here in this passage. Now, note 
secondly, and this is the place where, as I said, I'm going to 
lean on a couple of trusted brothers to try to give the sense of what 
we find in verses 16 to 24, in terms of the physical requirements 
with reference to the priesthood. Note the general statement in 
verses 16 and 17. For any man who has a defect 
shall not approach." So the general statement is such. Defects, not 
good. Defects, not allowed. Defects, 
not permissible in terms of the service of God in the call. Now, 
the specific description is quite detailed, and that's from verses 
18b all the way down to verse 20. There's a whole host of things 
in that list that cause us to reflect upon the fact that God 
has said none with these sorts of defects are authorized to 
offer the bread of God. Note in verse 21, no man of the 
descendants of Aaron the priest who has a defect shall come near 
to offer the offerings made by fire to the Lord. He has a defect. He shall not come near to offer 
the bread of his God. Robert Alter makes the observation, 
the underlying notion, however objectionable to modern sensibilities, 
That's my concern here. We read a list like this, we 
say, that's not fair. That doesn't seem right. Sounds 
like God has an ax to grind. Isn't God sovereign? Didn't God 
create that dwarf? Didn't God create that person 
and the eczema that they have? Didn't God create these sorts 
of people? Again, we've got to get it out 
of the mind that this means they're somehow hell bound. They're condemned, 
they're damned to eternal punishment. That's not the point. The point 
is, relative to the service of God, within the mass of Israel, 
you find those that are the sons of Aaron that don't have defects. So again, back to altar. The 
underlying notion, however objectionable to modern sensibilities, is one 
shared by many ancient religions. Just as the animal offered in 
sacrifice must be unblemished, the officiant offering the sacrifice 
must be without physical blemish. 1 Timothy 3 gives a list of prescriptions 
for what the man who functions as an elder in the Church of 
Christ must be. Now, admittedly, there's no prohibition 
against dwarves, there's no prohibition against eczema, there's no prohibition 
against amputees or anything like that. But there are these 
requirements built in by God. And as you read through Leviticus 
21 and 22, it is very clear that this comes from God. It's not 
Moses who sort of hatched this in his mind just to keep out 
those who are a bit unsavory. Gordon Wenham explains, the idea 
emerges that holiness finds physical expression in wholeness and normality. Then I want to read an extended 
quote from C. H. Spurgeon, again, just to help 
us navigate, just to help us see. Are modern sensibilities 
being offended with things like this? Now, Spurgeon's not expounding 
Leviticus 21. Spurgeon has a series of lectures 
to my students, he calls them, and he's dealing specifically 
with this kind of an issue with reference to the gospel ministry. 
He says, physical infirmities raise a question about the call 
of some excellent men. I would not, like Eusthenes, 
judge men by their features, but their general physique is 
no small criterion. That narrow chest does not indicate 
a man formed for public speech. You may think it odd, but still 
I feel very well assured that when a man has a contracted chest 
with no distance between his shoulders, the all-wise creator 
did not intend him habitually to preach. If he had meant him 
to speak, he would have given him in some measure breadth of 
chest, sufficient to yield a reasonable amount of long force. Elsewhere 
in lectures to my students, he gets after the narrow chest and 
he says to the students there, that's why we have dumbbells 
in the basement of the college. Go expand your chest. Be fit 
and prepared and ready. He goes on to say, when the Lord 
means a creature to run, He gives it nimble legs. And if He means 
another creature to preach, He will give it suitable lungs. 
A brother who has to pause in the middle of a sentence and 
work his air pump should ask himself whether there is not 
some other occupation for which he is better adapted. A man who 
can scarcely get through a sentence without pain can hardly be called 
to cry aloud and spare not. There may be exceptions, but 
is there not weight in the general rule? Again, this isn't exposition 
of Leviticus 21 proper. But there is a sense where when 
you have a man or an animal that is in the service of God Most 
High, of the sons of Aaron, try to pick those men that aren't 
going to be a distraction to others. He says, brethren with 
defective mouths and imperfect articulation are not usually 
called to preach the gospel. The same applies to brethren 
with no palate or an imperfect one. Application was received 
some short time ago from a young man who had a sort of rotary 
action of his jaw of the most painful sort to the beholder. 
His pastor commended him as a very holy young man who had been the 
means of bringing some to Christ. And he expressed the hope that 
I would receive him. But I could not see the propriety of it. 
I could not have looked at him while preaching without laughter 
if all the gold of Tarshish had been my reward. And in all probability, 
nine out of ten of his hearers would have been more sensitive 
than myself. A man with a big tongue which filled up his mouth 
and caused indistinctness. Another without teeth. Another 
who stammered. Another who could not pronounce 
all the alphabet. I have had the pain of declining 
on the ground that God had not given them those physical appliances 
which are, as the prayer book would put it, generally necessary." 
Again, not commentary on Leviticus 21 proper, but he makes the point. Bonar, or I'm sorry, Poole, picks 
up on the typological, the moral, and the prudential of this particular 
section. He says, the reason hereof is 
partly typical, that he might more fully represent Christ. the great high priest, who is 
typified both by the priest and sacrifice, and therefore both 
were to be without blemish. Partly moral to teach all Christians, 
and especially ministers of holy things, what purity and perfection 
of heart and life they should labor after, and that notorious 
blemishes in the mind or conversation render a man unfit for the ministry. 
the ministry of the gospel and partly prudential because such 
blemishes were apt to breed contempt of the person and consequently 
of his function and of the holy things where any minister. Again, 
this may offend our modern sensibilities, but it does resonate practically 
in terms of natural revelation. And here under God in special 
revelation. Now, having said that these are 
not to participate in the service of God in the house of the Lord, 
there is this qualification given in verse 22. Notice in verse 
22, he may eat the bread of his God, both the most holy and the 
holy. He's still a son of Aaron. He 
still doesn't get land. He still doesn't have the ability 
to generate income. He's not dispossessed from the 
sons of Aaron due to that defect. He is forbidden from priestly 
service in the house of God, offering the bread of God, but 
he is still a son of Aaron. He is still a part of that Levitical 
class. He is therefore still entitled 
to participate in the food that is given specifically to the 
priesthood. gill again, for though their 
natural infirmities disqualified them for service, yet they did 
not become hereby impure, either in a moral or ceremonial sense, 
and might eat of the sacrifices which impure persons might not." 
So this wasn't banishment, this wasn't exclusion, this wasn't 
a revocation of their status as sons of Aaron. It was simply 
a prohibition relative to offering the bread of God in the house 
of God for the glory of God. And so in chapter 22, since the 
food is mentioned in 21, 22, chapter 22 verses 1 to 16 amplifies 
that. It explains the various relations 
to the priests that may lawfully participate in that food that 
is received by the priest from the tithes and the offerings. 
So that's that section. So let's then move finally to 
the physical requirements for the sacrificial animals. in 22 
17 to 33. I hope you're seeing, again with 
some of the challenges even notwithstanding, how this points to Jesus. He 
must be the perfect priest. He must be the great high priest. He must as well be the perfect 
sacrifice. So all the things that are written 
here, all the things that are stipulated here, all the things 
regulated here are typical in their significance. They point 
forward to the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. 
Now with reference to the animals, note the requirement concerning 
sacrificial animals, verses 17 to 19. There's that emphasis 
on free will and without blemish, without blemish, without defect. And then the specific defects 
disqualifying sacrificial animals is given there specifically in 
verses 20 to 30. And the connection ought to be 
apparent. The connection ought to be tight. I'll just quote Alter again. 
The list of deformities for the animals unfit for the cult parallels 
the list of deformities for priests unfit for the cult in the previous 
chapter. The demand of God is the best 
for God. The demand of God in terms of 
the priest and the sacrifice is the best. That which is whole, 
that which is complete, that which is without defect, that 
which gives all glory and all praise and all honor to God most 
high. We've got the unacceptability 
of the animals just stipulated there in verse 20. Whatever has 
a defect, you shall not offer, for it shall not be acceptable 
on your behalf. And then the description in verses 
21 to 25. And again, consistent with that 
list that we find that disqualifies priests for their service. Now, 
there are some things unique to animals that aren't true of 
men, some things unique to men that aren't true of animals, 
but you see the connection. When it comes to the service 
of God, in the offering of the bread of God, both the offerer 
and the offered must be without blemish, must be pure, must not 
be defiled. It must be acceptable unto our 
God. Notice for a moment, you can 
turn to the book of Malachi. This is a lesson that they could 
have used in that particular prophet setting. Malachi chapter 
one. Malachi chapter 1, specifically at verse 6. A son 
honors his father and a servant his master. If then I am the 
father, where is my honor? And if I am a master, where is 
my reverence? Says the Lord of hosts to you priests who despise 
my name. The recurring cycle in the prophet 
Malachi is for Malachi to upbraid the nation. It is to convict 
them. It is to tell them their sin. 
And then consistently their response is, who, us? How did we despise 
your name? How did we do what you are condemning 
us for? In what way have we not been 
faithful? In what way have we not done 
what is appropriate before the Lord? At the end of verse 6, 
yet you say, in what way have we despised your name? Well, 
Malachi is going to tell them, or God's going to tell them through 
Malachi. You offer defiled food on my altar, but say, in what 
way have we defiled you? By saying the table of the Lord 
is contemptible. And when you offer the blind 
as a sacrifice, is it not evil? And when you offer the lame and 
sick, is it not evil? Offer it then to your governor. 
Would he be pleased with you? Would he accept you favorably, 
says the Lord of hosts? You see the argument? You're 
giving to God what you wouldn't dare pay your pagan governor 
in terms of taxes. You know he'd laugh you right 
out of the tax office. You know it would be condemned. 
You give to God that which is less than you give to the civil 
state? You give to God that which is 
blemished and defective when you would never, ever dream of 
doing that with reference to paying your own tax debt. Notice 
in verse 9, and I think here the prophet is personifying the 
people. But now entreat God's favor that 
he may be gracious to us while this is being done by your hands. 
Will he accept you favorably, says the Lord of hosts? Who is 
there even among you who would shut the door so that it would 
not kindle fire on my altar in vain? I have no pleasure in you, 
says the Lord of hosts, nor will I accept an offering from your 
hands. You see, they're caught, they're found out, and yet they've 
got this constant refrain. Now, entreat God's favor. Fetch 
God's blessings. Make it so that we enjoy the 
benefits of the land. I love verse 10. Who is there 
even among you who would shut the doors so that you would not 
kindle fire on my altar in vain? I have no pleasure in you, says 
the Lord of hosts. In other words, shut it down. 
If it's a sham, if it's a fake, if it's transgression, if it 
is lacking conformity under my law relative to sacrifice, then 
shut the thing down because it's hypocrisy. Notice in verse 11, 
for from the rising of the sun, even to its going down, my name 
shall be great among the Gentiles. In every place, incense shall 
be offered to my name, and a pure offering, for my name shall be 
great among the nations, says the Lord of hosts. But you profane 
it, in that you say, the table of the Lord is defiled, and its 
food is contemptible. You also say, oh, what a weariness, 
and you sneer at it, says the Lord of hosts. and you bring 
the stolen, the lame and the sick, thus you bring and offer 
it. Imagine being at that level of 
so-called holiness where you actually steal somebody else's 
animal, take it to the temple and offer it up as a sacrifice. 
Sacrifice involves a pinch to one's own flesh, not a pinch 
to your neighbor's flesh when you fetch his goat and take it 
and offer it up to God. Notice verse 14, But cursed be 
the deceiver, who has in his flock a male and takes a vow, 
but sacrifices to the Lord what is blemished. For I am a great 
king, says the Lord of hosts, and my name is to be feared among 
the nations. So Israel obviously needed this 
law revived in their own hearts during the prophet Malachi's 
tenure. But back to Leviticus chapter 
22. So we've got the defective animals and then the unacceptability 
of newborn animals in verses 26 to 30. This does not run on 
humanitarian reasons. It's not that, you know, God 
says, well, you know, leave that little baby. Just let Peanut 
live. That's not what's happening here. What is happening here specifically 
is typical. It's typological. pointing forward, 
preaching Jesus to us. Listen to John Gill. It was not 
to be taken from its dam and killed, either for food or sacrifice, 
before it was seven days old. He cites a particular Reformed 
Protestant theologian named Thagius. He says, the Hebrews give two 
reasons why a creature might not be offered before the eighth 
day. One is that a Sabbath might pass over it, nothing being perfect 
and consistent without it, that giving, as they say, perfection 
and consistence to all the things of the world. And the other, 
as the heavens and the earth being perfected in seven days, 
a creature which lives so long seems to be, as it were, perfect. 
See? Phagius was a Hebrew scholar, 
Old Testament scholar. So he says that's how the Jews 
interpret this prohibition against the newborn. But then he observes, 
if we inquire after the mystical sense of it, we might like the 
word typological a little better, a better reason is to be given 
namely that Christ, the type of all the sacrifices was not 
to be offered or suffer death in his infancy, which Herod contrived, 
but at man's estate and to show that no man is fit to be a propitiatory 
sacrifice through weakness and inability, being unable to stand 
before the justice of God only Christ, in whom is perfection 
of strength." Bonar, in his commentary, makes a similar observation. 
This precept guards the type. The animal sacrifice must have 
lived a complete time, seven days. For the anti-type was not 
to be offered in infancy, but was to live the full of a man 
of sorrows. As during the six days of creation 
there was time for God to unfold gradually his creating skill, 
so this period becomes symbolical in a manner of sufficient time 
to unfold and develop any purpose. Christ, our surety, was to live 
far beyond infancy, tasting the world's sorrows as He breathed 
its air, taking time to open out the law and exhibit conformity 
to it all, before His set time came that He must die. So the 
prohibition against killing a newborn animal has nothing to do with 
humanitarianism and everything to do with Christology. I think 
these brothers have the right sense of the text. And then the 
passage ends in verses 31 to 33 to sort of culminate everything 
concerning the requirements for priesthood, and for sacrifice. Notice the exhortation in verse 
31. Therefore you shall keep my commandments 
and perform them. I am the Lord. The prohibition 
is stated, verse 32a. You shall not profane my holy 
name, but I will be hallowed among the children of Israel. 
I am the Lord who sanctifies you. I am the Lord who brought 
you out of the land of Egypt to be your God. I am the Lord. Again, this wasn't Moses' idea. This wasn't Moses with an ax 
to grind against several of the sons of Aaron. It is Moses, under 
the inspiration of the spirit of the living God, communicating 
the legislation concerning a perfect priesthood, or in this sense, 
a typically perfect priesthood and a perfect sacrifice. Well, two thoughts in conclusion. 
First, the superiority of the new covenant. We see that eunuchs 
are forbidden from entering into the assembly of the Lord. In 
this list, in Leviticus 21, in that section with reference to 
physical impediment, but Deuteronomy 23, verse 1, one who is emasculated 
shall not enter into the assembly of the Lord. Lo and behold, the 
prophet Isaiah speaks concerning the messianic age, and he says 
that eunuchs will be drawing nigh. And lo and behold, we get 
to Acts chapter 8, and there's that Ethiopian eunuch. Happened 
to be reading the prophet Isaiah at chapter 53, and Philip happens 
to fall upon him. The significance there is not 
only, it is, the salvation of the Ethiopian eunuch, but the 
blessed fulfillment of new covenant reality specified by God through 
Isaiah that now eunuchs enter into the assembly of the Lord 
based on the reality of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior. 
The exclusion of the maimed from the house of the Lord. and the 
inclusion in the New Covenant. Luke chapter 14, that statement 
about going into the highways and the hedges, to call the main, 
to call the lane, that was obviously signifying there was something 
going on, New Covenant-ish, that far exceeds and surpasses the 
Old Covenant. And then the second observation 
is the glory of the Lord Jesus, the perfect high priest and the 
perfect sacrifice. This is what I suggest Leviticus 
is all about. That's what the entirety of the 
Old Testament is all about. Remember Jesus' condemnation 
of the religious leaders in John 5. You search the scriptures, 
for in them you think you have eternal life. But these are they 
that testify of me. Abraham rejoiced to see my day. He saw it and he was glad. John 
chapter 8. The Old Testament drips of Christ. Do not neglect the Old Testament. 
Do not neglect the reading of Old Testament scripture. It is 
full of Jesus, typically pointing us forward to that Lamb of God 
who takes away the sin of the world. So the Lord Jesus is perfectly 
suited to serve as the high priest of the new covenant, the nature 
of the priest. John 1.1 and John 1.14, in the 
beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word 
was God. The Word became flesh and dwelt 
among us. He is perfectly suited for that 
work. In fact, our confession in chapter 
8, paragraph 3, speaks of His suitability. The Lord Jesus, 
in His human nature thus united to the Divine, in the person 
of the Son, was sanctified and anointed with the Holy Spirit 
above measure, having in Him all the treasures of wisdom and 
knowledge, in whom it pleased the Father that all fullness 
should dwell, to the end that, being holy, harmless, undefiled, 
and full of grace and truth, He might be thoroughly furnished 
to execute the office of mediator and surety. which office he took 
not upon himself, but was there unto called by his father, who 
also put all power and judgment in his hand and gave him commandment 
to execute the same." So the Lord Jesus is perfectly suited 
to function as the high priest of the new covenant. But additionally, 
Jesus is perfectly suited to serve as the sacrifice in the 
new covenant. John the Baptist says, behold 
the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. He's unblemished. He's without defect. He is pure. He is perfect. The very sacrifice 
that God demands, God provides in the person and in the work 
of his own blessed son. Turn to the book of Hebrews, 
Hebrews chapter seven specifically. As I mentioned, from 5.1 all 
the way to 10.18, the emphasis is upon the priesthood of Jesus 
Christ. We'll just sort of focus in on 
this one section, and then we'll close. Notice in chapter 7, verses 
20 to 28, you have the Lord's appointment to office as the 
mediator. As our confession says, which 
office he took not upon himself, He was appointed by the oath 
of God the Father for this particular work. Verse 20, and in as much as he 
was not made priest without an oath, for they had become priests 
without an oath, but he with an oath, by him who said to him, 
the Lord has sworn and will not relent, you are a priest forever, 
according to the order of Melchizedek, by so much more, Jesus has become 
surety of a better covenant. The surety of a better covenant 
that is founded on better promises, according to 8.6, which affords 
a better hope, according to chapter 7 and verse 19. There is continuity 
between the covenants, but there is some great discontinuity as 
well. This attempt to flatten things 
out and make the new covenant the old covenant is a backward 
step in redemptive history. We should rejoice that we get 
to participate in the better covenant that is grounded upon 
better promises, that affords a better hope, We shouldn't want 
to minimize those discontinuities. We shouldn't want to argue based 
on some other doctrinal commitments that the new is really just the 
old, but maybe just a little bit better. But that's not what 
the emphasis in the book of Hebrews is on. It's the superiority of 
Jesus Christ. Then notice the accomplishment 
of redemption in verses 25 to 28. Therefore, he is also able 
to save to the uttermost those who come to God through him, 
since he always lives to make intercession for them. He is 
able to save to the uttermost. He saves completely. Isn't that 
good news? Isn't that encouraging? Isn't 
that give you hope and the ability to get out of bed tomorrow morning? 
He doesn't save us partially. He doesn't save us for a time, 
but he saves us to the uttermost. Why? Because he's the great high 
priest and the sacrifice that he sacrificed was himself. And 
that wrought atonement for us men and for our salvation. Notice 
in verse 26, for such a high priest was fitting for us, who 
is holy, harmless, and undefiled, separate from sinners, and has 
become higher than the heavens, who does not need daily as those 
high priests to offer up sacrifices, first for his own sins and then 
for the people's. For this he did once for all 
when he offered up himself. That once-for-all language that 
is employed by the apostles several times in this book is again such 
encouragement. The sacrifice doesn't need to 
be duplicated. It doesn't need to be replicated. 
We don't need to go through that. Christ paid the debt once for 
all. He says in John 19 30, it is 
Finished! And that's the emphasis that 
the apostle brings here. Notice in chapter 10, verses 
1 to 4. I won't read the whole thing, 
but it simply says there is an inefficacy with reference to 
the blood of bulls and goats. But it wasn't that those were 
without use. They had use in the old covenant 
for reasons of holiness and purity and cleanliness and typology. They pointed us forward or pointed 
them forward to the great Lamb of God who takes away the sin 
of the world. and then the efficacy of the 
blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. Notice in chapter nine, specifically 
at verse 12, not with the blood of goats and calves, but with 
his own blood, he entered the most holy place once for all, 
having obtained eternal redemption. And then drop down to verse 15, 
and for this reason he is the mediator of the new covenant 
by means of death for the redemption of the transgressions under the 
first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise 
of the eternal inheritance. So the efficacy of Christ's blood 
had a retrospective application for old covenant saints. If the 
blood of bulls and goats couldn't do it, how did they get to heaven? 
Because of what the blood of the bulls and goats typified, 
what it pointed them forward to. They believed in the promise 
of the coming Messiah, and by grace they were justified before 
God Most High. And then 10, 11 to 15, and every 
priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same 
sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But this man, after 
he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at 
the right hand of God. From that time, waiting till 
his enemies are made his footstool, for by one offering he has perfected 
forever those who are being sanctified." Notice that Christ is here sitting 
down. In Acts chapter 7, when Stephen 
is filled with the Holy Spirit, and he gazes into heaven, and 
he sees the glory of God, and Jesus standing at his right hand. Remember the explanation? Jesus 
is standing there to receive his holy martyr, Stephen, when 
he breathes his last. Jesus is standing there in judgment 
and as the tribunal over the Sanhedrin that is unlawfully 
executing Christ's martyr. Here he's sitting. What do you 
think the sitting underscores? It underscores completion. Finished. It's over. He doesn't have to 
keep duplicating this activity. It's once for all. So brethren, 
Leviticus 21 and 22, while it may offend our delicate sensitivities, 
is nevertheless rich in Christology. It points us to that one who 
satisfies the requirement to be the great high priest and 
to be the perfect sacrifice that God demands. God provides it 
in the person and the work of His blessed Son. Let us pray. 
Our Father in heaven, we thank You for Your Word. We thank You 
for the Old Testament and how it points us to our Lord Jesus, 
the New Testament, how it explains the fulfillment and the realization, 
and God, how we praise You and thank You for His work on our 
behalf. And as we eat this bread tonight, 
as we drink this cup, May we continually ponder the glory 
of the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ and what he went through 
on our behalf. May you draw out our hearts in worship and in 
love and in adoration. May you strengthen us in our 
faith. May you further conform us unto the image of your beloved 
son. And may you fit us for service in your hand. And we ask this 
through Jesus Christ, our Lord. Amen. Well, you can turn to Matthew's 
gospel, Matthew chapter 26. Matthew chapter 26, that is the 
section we will read from after the brothers pass out the bread. 
But I just want to give us a few reminders concerning the sacrament 
or the ordinance of the Lord's Supper. Remember, it's for believers 
only. If you're not a believer, we 
would ask that you do not participate or take. The main emphasis for 
an unbeliever is to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, to look 
to Him in faith, and to know the joy of being found in Him. As well, the sacrament is for 
believers who are dealing with their sin. That's the emphasis 
in 1 Corinthians 11. They had a meal in conjunction 
with the supper, and at that meal, there was some sin happening. 
So Paul rebukes them, Paul reproves them, Paul chides them, and Paul 
tells them to examine themselves. And the examination isn't to 
find perfection in the heart, because none of us would ever 
be able to take. The examination is to see, if you've got sin 
that you're not dealing with, We've all got remaining corruption. 
That's a giving. And the supper is for us. But 
if there's some sin we're not dealing with, we're unwilling 
to deal with, we're not going to let go of it. Paul, I think, 
makes a good statement in a different context, but he says, I always 
strive to maintain a conscience void of offense toward God and 
toward men. That's a good sort of overarching 
principle when it comes to this believers who are dealing with 
their sin. Remember, the sacrament is a 
means of grace, for sure, but the elements are not changed. 
This is not transubstantiation. It is not consubstantiation. 
And then ultimately, the sacrament points us to Christ. Yes, see 
your sin, confess your sin, repent of your sin, and find that forgiveness 
with thee that thou mayest be feared. As John Murray said, 
it is the Lord we are remembering. So frequently believers become 
so introspective that preoccupation with themselves excludes preoccupation 
with Christ. Jesus says, do this in remembrance 
of me, not of you. Do this in remembrance of the 
one who lived and who died and who was raised again. Well, I'll 
ask the brothers if they can pass out the bread. Please do 
not take the bread until we read the appropriate section and pray 
to God. But we'll sing Psalm 130A, as 
in alpha. You can remain seated. Psalm 130A, as in alpha.