07-Other Ritual Types

Other Ritual Types In addition to the greater and more important ceremonial institutions or types hitherto considered, a number of other ritual types are set forth in the Pentateuch which also are shadows of good things. We purpose in this chapter to bring together the more important of these miscellaneous types. These were given for our learning, and doubtless God intends we should get the lessons they contain for us. As we have already dealt with the principles of truth set forth by most of these, they will be treated only in those particulars that belong especially to them.

Clean and Unclean Meats -- Leviticus 11, Deuteronomy 14 The distinctions of the Mosaic law between clean and unclean foods might seem puerile were it not for their manifestation of profound knowledge of the animal kingdom, of wholesome dietetics, and their far reaching influence as types of great moral and spiritual realities. That these distinctions belonged to that great system of types hitherto considered there can be no doubt. The clean animals were those which both divided the hoof and chewed the cud. These were especially the ox, sheep, goat, and deer species. The swine was unclean because, though it divided the hoof, yet it did not chew the cud. The camel, coney, and hare on the other hand, were unclean because they did not part the hoof, though they chewed the cud. Of fish only those were clean which had both fins and scales. Of fowls no general rule was given by Moses; but from his long lists of clean and unclean fowls the general principle usually applies that, as with animals, carnivorous birds as the eagle, vulture, raven, and owl were unclean. In these distinctions and restrictions there were probably a number of aims and advantages, though the chief one was typical and moral. Along with this chief idea were certain secondary benefits accruing to Israel, as we found to be true of the Sabbath and other feasts, which though they were principally beneficial in their lessons of spiritual truth, yet they brought physical, social, political, and commercial benefits. In these distinctions between meats God gave a system of wholesome dietetics. The clean animals were generally the very best and most nutritious for food, although we must allow that some pronounced unclean were almost if not entirely as wholesome as those called clean. The distinctions were somewhat arbitrary because typical. So likewise in the feasts, though there were temporal benefits in the times and nature of their observance, yet there was more or less of the arbitrary element in their appointment. Science has allowed and the facts of experience demonstrate that as a class the clean animals are very healthful. Swine’s flesh is said to be especially unhealthy in warm climates where such diseases as leprosy are common. It has been asserted that during epidemics, plagues, etc., Jews do not suffer to the same extent as do those who eat swine’s flesh. Since God chose to make this distinction in meats, wisdom and mercy are shown in the choice of those for food that are best adapted to man’s needs.

Another great temporal benefit to Israel from these distinctions in food was that it made a wall of separation between them and their heathen neighbors socially. Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego demonstrated this when they refused to defile themselves with the king’s food in Nebuchadnezzar’s court. By eating the ox, which the Egyptians regarded as sacred, the Israelite separated himself from the subtle influence of his idolatrous neighbors to the south, and in refusing swine’s flesh, which was eaten by the Canaanites, we would not be very liable to social intercourse with these wicked neighbors. But the more direct purpose of these restrictions on food was to teach that important fact of moral distinctions and to educate men to the idea of holiness. As the washings of the body are a proper type of the cleansing of the soul, so the food that furnishes nourishment and pleasure to the body is a fit symbol of those things of which the soul partakes. As holiness requires careful discrimination in what is given place in the heart, so in this type God made discrimination as to clean and unclean foods for the body.

Because of natural depravity and perverse teaching, men without the influence of God’s revelation have very confused ideas of holiness and sin. And except for these ceremonial distinctions and what has them for its basis, we might be as mixed in our ideas of morals as are the Turks and Hindus at this day. It is an elementary lesson in holiness. It, along with similar lessons from the tabernacle, priesthood, offerings, and feasts, goes to make up the Christian conception of holiness. The veils, consecrations, sprinklings of blood, and washings with water constantly witness to us, as well as do these distinctions in meats, that God is holy, man is sinful, and that fellowship between God and men is possible only by men being cleansed from sin and made holy. Opposers of holiness today among professors of Christianity have missed the most important fact of true religion-that God desires to make men holy.

Defilement of Childbirth and Issues -- Leviticus 12, 15 A perusal by the reader of the chapters to which reference is given beneath the title of this paragraph will doubtless be profitable, especially since, for obvious reasons, we refrain from giving the details of these impurities. The defilements of this class were all related to the production of life-the giving birth to children or issues in the organs connected therewith. That these impurities were viewed not primarily as of a physical but as of a ceremonial nature is certain from the fact that burnt and sin offerings were required for their purification. This is further proved by the fact that a woman who had given birth to a male child was disqualified from entering the court of the sanctuary for thirty three days after she was clean to enter society; also by the period of uncleanness for a female child being twice as long as for a male child.

Here then we again have a rite that typifies a great moral fact. But how do production and birth have connection with moral defilement ? What is this birth sin that is here typically depicted ? The "sweet singer of Israel" answers, "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me" (Psalms 51:5). In this ceremonial defilement and cleansing, as well as in certain other forms of uncleanness and their cleansing, God has been pleased to set before us the awful fact of the inborn depravity of men’s natures that causes them to "go astray as soon as they be born" (Psalms 58:3). This view has been held by such modern writers as Seiss and Fairbairn as well as by some of the Jewish doctors. This depravity of the nature here typified is probably that uncleanness for which that fountain was opened in the house of David, as both sin and uncleanness are mentioned (see Zechariah 13:1).

Neither is it unreasonable that a truth so significant to religion should be given such typical recognition as to its existence and removal. That ceremonial defilement was cleansed by the offering of a lamb for a burnt offering and a fowl for a sin offering forty days after the child’s birth if a male, or eighty days after if a female. The blood of those animals was typical of the precious blood of Christ, who, "that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate" (Hebrews 13:12). This typical rite teaches, contrary to the Pelagian theory, that native depravity exists, and, contrary to a more common theory, that it may be removed not by a growth process but by the blood of Jesus in full salvation.

Leprosy and Its Cleansing -- Leviticus 13, 14 The description of leprosy given in Leviticus 13, 14 is said to be the oldest description extant of any disease. It was not given here, however, for medical purposes, nor were the regulations concerning it for effecting a cure. This is clear because the rites of the cleansing were for him who had become clean already. He was to go to the priest, not to the physician.

Doubtless the restrictions on the leper in separating him from society were beneficial in preventing the spread of the disease at the time of the exodus, when the mode of life would make the Israelites especially liable to it. But as with temporal benefits from other Mosaic institutions, that was not the primary purpose of Moses’ writings on the subject. Other diseases more deadly, equally difficult to cure, and more contagious are not mentioned. No sacrifices were prescribed for those who had recovered from them. To have required elaborate rites for every form of disease would have made a great burden upon the people. God chose this particular disease because of its general nature to be a type of that most awful of all diseases-sin. In several respects it is parallel with sin and its effects in men.

It is a loathsome, defiling disease in its developed stages. It begins with a white spot in the skin which slowly and gradually spreads over the entire body "bleaching the hair white wherever it showed itself, crusting the affected parts with shining scales, and causing swellings and sores. From the skin it slowly ate its way through the tissues, to the bones and joints, and even to the marrow, rotting the whole body piecemeal." And as leprosy affects the body, so sin affects the soul. This loathsome, corrupting, degrading disease of the body, as some one has remarked, "is God’s language by which he describes sin as it appears in his sight."

Leprosy is like sin also in that it is seemingly not serious in its earlier stages. It may be scarcely visible to the eye, only a small rising in the flesh, a slight red spot, like the puncture from a pin. An expert may be necessary to detect it. But it spreads gradually and deepens until the subject becomes horrible to behold; fingers are eaten away, ears drop off, and he becomes a mass of putrefying corruption indescribable. So sin, so awful in its consequences, is very harmless in appearance in its beginning. That shocking crime of which you recently read in the newspaper doubtless had its beginning in what appeared a very harmless thought. All the sin that has stained the world throughout man’s history began with one admiring look of our mother Eve at the forbidden fruit. Beware of sin. It is terrible in its consequences.

Leprosy is contagious by intimate contact. For this reason the leper must dwell in a house apart, as did Uzziah king of Judah, whom God smote. The leper was to go with rent clothes and bared head as a sign of sorrow, to wear a bandage on the lip or chin as a badge of his uncleanness, and to cry to any who approached him, "Unclean, unclean." If God chose such an awful spectacle to symbolize sin, how hateful to his holy eyes must sin itself appear! The sinner, like the leper, is unfit to associate with his fellows-a menace to society, spreading his awful malady wherever he goes-is an object of abhorrence to the holy; and himself is filled with dread of the awful consequences awaiting in the future.

Finally leprosy is almost incurable and was probably entirely so by human means in Bible times. Only when God in pity heard the prayers of the meek Moses was Miriam made clean. Only the God of Israel by the word of his prophet Elisha could heal the great man Naaman of his disease. But, thank God, he who said to the suppliant leper, "I will, be thou clean," can say as effectually to the moral leper, "Thy sins be forgiven thee." How remarkably parallel are leprosy and sin! No human remedy availed for either; but he who healed the lepers also saves from sin. And here we have the most glorious part of this type in the rites for the cleansing of the leper, which foreshadowed God’s work of cleansing men from sin. When the leper became clean he was to present himself to the priest. If the priest found him clean, two birds were taken "alive and clean." One of these was killed in a vessel containing some fresh water, that its blood and the water might be mixed together. Then the live bird was dipped in the mingled water and blood and released to fly away clean, while the priest took the scarlet wool and hyssop on the handle of cedar wood to sprinkle the bloody water seven times on the cleansed leper. What a beautiful type of our cleansing from sin! Cleansing was by blood and water, water the symbol of God’s word. One bird died that his fellow might through his life’s blood be made clean and go free. No comment is needed here. The sprinkling of the bloody water seven times was symbolic of the cleansing of the leper, while the freed bird represented his release from sin’s consequences. But the atonement also had to be made. After eight days he had to appear at God’s altar with a trespass offering, a sin offering, a burnt and a meat offering, also a log of oil. The blood of the trespass offering was to be placed upon his ear, thumb, and toe to signify complete cleansing, and likewise of the oil to typify the making holy of the sinner by the presence of the Holy Spirit coming upon him.

Reader, if spots of sin mar your soul, behold in this vivid type of sin the awful picture God has here given of your condition. Your sin will "eat as cloth a canker," and finally destroy your soul forever. Flee to the cleansing blood of Jesus, which can cleanse you from every spot of sin’s awful malady and even remove its taint from your inmost nature. Bow before your Lord as one of old with the earnest prayer, "Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean," and hear his voice saying in accents of infinite pity, "I will, be thou clean." The Nazareth -- Numbers 6 A Nazareth, according to the meaning of the name, is one who is separated. He was one who made a vow, devoting himself to a life of special holiness. This separation was to continue for a definite period, after which certain sacrifices were to be offered. We have record, however, of three persons who were Nazarites for life, having been devoted to God by their parents-Samson, Samuel, and John the Baptist. This special holiness consisted in three things: (1) total abstinence from wine, or grapes in any form, and from other strong drink; (2) keeping from ceremonial defilement caused by coming in contact with a dead body; (3) leaving the hair of the head unshorn during the period of separation. Intoxicants in all forms, and to make the separation more complete, grapes, in every form, from which intoxicants were usually made, were forbidden. This was doubtless, as with the priests, who were forbidden to drink wine during their ministrations (Leviticus 10:8-9), that their faculties might not be stupefied or benumbed. The effects of wine on the mind well represent the benumbing effects of sin generally upon the soul’s devotion. Of the unshorn hair it is said, "The consecration of his God is upon his head." Here the sign is called by that which it signified-consecration, separation. As the hair upon the woman’s head is described by the apostle PauI as the token of subjection to her husband-"For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head" (1 Corinthians 11:10)-so the badge of the Nazareth, his long hair, signified his special subjection to God. That this is the meaning of the unshorn locks is shown also by the fact that if he accidentally touched a dead body he had to remove his sign of dedication, because he had failed to keep consecrated. In the Nazareth we have a very exact type of consecration. We have already found this great truth set forth in the meat offering, and in the Feasts of First fruits and Pentecost. Here we have another proof that God attaches much importance to our consecration. And this consecration is to consist, not merely in our abstinence from that which is evil, as signified by the Nazareth keeping himself from wine and dead things, but it is to have a positive aspect, a doing of that which is good, as shown by the unshorn locks. Every Christian who fails in the life of consecration to God will, like Samson when shorn of his hair, find himself weak like other men, void of the power of God in his life for personal holiness and divine service in building up God’s kingdom.

God did not repeatedly set forth consecration in these types for nought. He intends that those who serve him be consecrated. And we dare to say consecration is essential to Christian discipleship. "Whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he can not be my disciple" (Luke 14:33). He whose love for money or fame hinders him from doing what God gives him to do is not a true Nazareth. He who loves parents, wife, children, or friends more than the will of God needs the lesson this type taught. God needs more Nazarites for life, like Samuel and John the Baptist.

Lack of space forbids a full discussion of these different ritual types. A few of the less important types have not been mentioned, but we have presented the principal Mosaic types and their meanings. The reader will probably be able, from what has been written, to apply the same general principle of interpretation to those not discussed here.