Numbers 18

Updated
2001-05-26; 14:32:21utc

D. Role of the Priesthood (continued) 17:1-19:22

2. The task description of the Levites 18:1-32

In this chapter God, first of all, further limits the damage done by the people to themselves in holding the priests and Levites solely responsible for offenses committed against the sanctuary (vs. 1-7). Secondly, He fixed the wages of the priests (vs. 8-19). Thirdly, the Lord explains to Aaron and his sons the difference between his inheritance and that of the other Israelites (vs. 20-24). And, finally, the Levites are told what to do with their tithes (vs. 25-32).

This is the first and only instance in Scripture were God addresses Aaron directly and exclusively. Thus far we only read: "The Lord said to Moses," or at most "the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron." The Pulpit Commentary sees in this a possibility that these verses may be of a later date, when the rebellion of Korah had died away completely, and Aaron's position as the High Priest had been firmly established in the minds of the people. It is not clear to me, however, why the Almighty would be influenced by the thoughts of the people about the priesthood before He would address Aaron personally.

God says to Aaron: "You, your sons and your father's family are to bear the responsibility for offenses against the sanctuary, and you and your sons alone are to bear the responsibility for offenses against the priesthood." The key word in this sentence is obviously "responsibility."

From a linguistic point of view this could mean several things. We could understand that the Lord gave Aaron the task to prevent future rebellions such as had just taken place under the instigation of Korah, or it could mean that Aaron and his immediate family would take the brunt of God's wrath in case such offenses occurred. In the light of biblical revelation, however, we understand that the charge given to Aaron was to be a picture of the office of our Lord Jesus Christ, in that He took upon Himself the sin of the world. The Pulpit Commentary concurs with this, by saying: "The general sense of the phrase is, 'to be responsible for the iniquity,' i. e. for anything which caused displeasure in the eyes of God, 'in connection with the sacred things and the service of them;' hence it meant either to be responsible for such iniquity, as being held accountable for it, and having to endure the penalty, or as being permitted and enabled to take such accountability on oneself, and so discharge it from others. This double sense is exactly reflected in the Greek word airein, as applied to our Lord (John i. 29)." We are reminded of Isaiah's words: "We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all."[ 1 ]

We should also see what God says here, not only against the background of Korah recent insurrection, but of the offense of Aaron's sons, Nadab and Abihu, who paid for their insolence with their own lives.[ 2 ] When God places Aaron in this position, he does exemplify the essence of Christ's ministry on earth, but it is the dark side of the image. In the most literal sense of the word Aaron becomes God's scapegoat. The difference between Aaron and Christ was, among many others, that Aaron was held responsible for the sins of Israel, and Christ carried away the sin of the world. In the words of John the Baptist: "Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!"[ 3 ] So Aaron became one of the first persons in the world to identify with the death of Christ. Aaron was put in the position in which we all are put by God, once we acknowledge Christ as our Lord and Savior. The Apostle Paul puts it this way: "Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life. If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection."[ 4 ]

In a sense, Aaron's position was not a new one. His priestly garments, which included the shoulder pieces and the breastplate engraved with the names of the tribes of Israel, made him the one who carried the burden of the people before the Lord. He was their intercessor; he stood between the Lord and the people, as a buffer between both parties. God would, from now on consider insurrections such as Korah's as Aaron's revolt, and Aaron would save the people from the wrath of God. Some of this he had done already when he atoned for the people's sin by standing between the living and the dead with his censor of incense, as we read in the previous chapter.

But Aaron was not to carry his burden alone. God called the Levites to his side who, although not in the same degree as Aaron, would share responsibility for the tent and its furnishings and stand between the Lord and the nation. This command does not break any new ground. The various clans of the tribe of Levi had already been assigned their different responsibilities in regard to the tabernacle and what it contained.

There is a play on words that is lost in the translation in the phrase: "Bring your fellow Levites from your ancestral tribe to join you and assist you." From Adam Clarke's Commentary we copy: "There is a fine paronomasia, or play upon words, in the original. Leewiy … comes from the root laawah …, to join to, couple, associate: hence, Moses says, the Levites, yilaawuw …, shall be joined, or associated with the priests; they shall conjointly perform the whole of the sacred office, but the priests shall be principal, the Levites only their associates or assistants."

It seems that this chapter expounds a principle that is lost in our New Testament dispensation and that could still have practical value if present day Christians would begin to practice it anew. This responsibility for offenses committed against the sanctuary and the priesthood that Aaron and his sons, as well as the other Levites had to bear, was, obviously, the core of their ministry unto the Lord. Outwardly, it expressed itself in the service of the tabernacle which included the various sacrifices of atonement. But the phrase "bear the responsibility" seems to require a mental and emotional attitude also, a feeling of responsibility for the moral behavior of their fellow man and a yearning to see the Lord's sanctification take hold of the people. Job felt responsible for the behavior of his children. We read: "His sons used to take turns holding feasts in their homes, and they would invite their three sisters to eat and drink with them. When a period of feasting had run its course, Job would send and have them purified. Early in the morning he would sacrifice a burnt offering for each of them, thinking, 'Perhaps my children have sinned and cursed God in their hearts.' This was Job's regular custom."[ 5 ] We find the same passion in Paul's intercession for his spiritual children. To the Galatians he writes: "My dear children, for whom I am again in the pains of childbirth until Christ is formed in you, how I wish I could be with you now and change my tone, because I am perplexed about you!"[ 6 ] God wants us to be deeply emotionally involved when we intercede for the lives of others, but even more than emotionally only. What God required of Aaron was the ultimate sacrifice, it was death to himself; God demanded Aaron's life and that of his fellow Levites instead of the lives of the other Israelites. The Apostle Paul draws the ultimate conclusion of the ministry God had given him, when he wrote about his intercession for his fellowmen, the Jewish nation: "I speak the truth in Christ-- I am not lying, my conscience confirms it in the Holy Spirit-- I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, those of my own race, the people of Israel."[ 7 ]

It is difficult for us to understand the depth of death that was hidden in the ministry God had given to Aaron and the Levites as a gift. It was, primarily, a ministry of death. The fact that ultimately it was a death by substitution, and that under that Old Testament dispensation the blood of the sacrificial animal was taken instead of the life of the sinner, made the issue of death not less serious.

The first lesson God wanted to imprint upon the minds of His people was the awesomeness of His holiness. For sinful human being God's holiness meant death. But even more, God had in mind the death of His own Son, who would ultimately carry away the sins of the world on the cross. He wanted Aaron and the Levites to know how it felt to be cursed and cut off from God for the sake of their brothers, to use Paul's words. In the same way God had shared before with His friend Abraham the emotions of a father who gives his only son, the one he loves, into death.[ 8 ]

This does not mean, of course, that death is the end. God is the source of life, and blessing, and fullness. But the path to this source leads first through death. Aaron's ministry was, ultimately, a glorious ministry, represented by a blooming and fruit bearing cutting of an almond tree. But the branch that bloomed was the branch that had been cut of the tree, it died first.

The second lesson God wanted to teach, both to Aaron and to the whole nation of Israel, was that the responsibility for sin would ultimately be carried by one man alone. Aaron was a type of Christ, not only as the High Priest who stood between God and the people, but also as the lamb with which he identified himself when he laid his hands on its head before it was slain. Sin came into the world through one man; sin would be taken out of the world by one man. The Apostle Paul explains this clearly in his epistle to the Romans.[ 9 ]

In the context of Israel's journey through the desert this responsibility was shared by Aaron's sons and by the whole tribe of Levi and it was expressed in the division of tasks to which each branch was assigned. Those tasks pertaining to the transportation of the tabernacle and its furniture ended, of course, once Israel was settled in Canaan. The details of the various responsibilities are spelled out in ch. 4.

Twice in talking about the responsibilities of the priests and the Levites, the Lord uses the word "gift." He says to Aaron: "I am giving you the service of the priesthood as a gift," and "I myself have selected your fellow Levites from among the Israelites as a gift to you, dedicated to the LORD to do the work at the Tent of Meeting."

In view of the fact that the priesthood involved a responsibility that endangered the very lives of the priests and the Levites, "gift" seems to be a strange word to use in this context. The majority of people in this world believe that the most important thing in this world is to stay alive. Most of us would not hesitate to turn down God's "gift of death." As New Testament Christians we have a hard time seeing God's call to a life threatening ministry as a gift of grace. Yet, the Bible calls it grace when we risk our lives in the service of the Lord. Paul quotes from the psalms when he says: "As it is written: For your sake we face death all day long; we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered.' "[ 10 ] And to the friends in Caesarea he said: "Why are you weeping and breaking my heart? I am ready not only to be bound, but also to die in Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus."[ 11 ] A closer look at God's gift to Aaron makes us realize that the grace that is involved in the acceptance transcends all human philosophy of life. Aaron's willingness to die for his God became the key to his resurrection. Aaron's blood, which he was willing to shed was an image of the blood of the eternal covenant through which our Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the sheep, was brought back from the dead, as the writer of the epistle to the Hebrews put is so beautifully.[ 12 ] Aaron's priesthood also exemplifies the priesthood of every believer in the Lord Jesus Christ. As priests in the Kingdom of Heaven, we will "want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead."[ 13 ] God's gift of death is the key to our resurrection.

In the second part of this chapter, vs. 8-19, God fixed the wages of the priests. The allowance God allots to the priests is a very generous one: the best portions of almost all the sacrifices that are brought in the tabernacle will be rightfully theirs. It should be noted that the priests did not live of the alms of the people. Their support comes from the Lord, not from men. The sacrifices and offerings were presented by the people to God, and it was God who gave them back to Aaron. The Lord says clearly: "All the holy offerings the Israelites give me I give to you and your sons as your portion and regular share." In practice it amounted to the same thing whether the people gave their offerings to Aaron, or that they were given to the Lord and the Lord gave them back to Aaron, but the difference in principle is enormous. Aaron was paid by the Lord, not by his fellow Israelites. This means that he had to trust the Lord for his support, and he could act independently from the people, since he did not depend upon them financially. If this same principle were to be applied to the pastorate of the New Testament dispensation, the difference in the relationship between a pastor and his church would change dramatically. The apostle Paul was quite aware of the fact that there are strings attached to any financial support and, consequently, he took great pains to remain financially independent of the churches he planted and to which he ministered. The Apostle draws a parallel between the Old Testament arrangements for the priests and the New Testament prerogatives of the preachers of the Gospel. To the Christians in Corinth he writes: "Don't you know that those who work in the temple get their food from the temple, and those who serve at the altar share in what is offered on the altar? In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel."[ 14 ] But, immediately following this, he says: "But I have not used any of these rights. And I am not writing this in the hope that you will do such things for me. I would rather die than have anyone deprive me of this boast.... What then is my reward? Just this: that in preaching the gospel I may offer it free of charge, and so not make use of my rights in preaching it. Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible."[ 15 ]

It also means that tithing is done to the Lord and not to a church or ministry. The Israelites did not bring their offerings to the tabernacle as a payment for Aaron and his family, but as part of the obligations they had to fulfill before the Lord. God put Aaron in charge of these offerings; he was to receive them and pass them on, and God paid him for his services. This arrangement created a philosophy of giving to the Lord which was quite different from the raising of support for missionaries, and of funds for projects, and payments of salaries to pastors that we see in today's church. It is true that we do not receive pardon of our sins because we bring a sacrificial animal and give it to the Lord, so that the church and its ministries can receive an allowance in the form of meat and produce. The fact that Jesus' sacrifice for our sins abolished all animal sacrifices did, however, not bring about a change in our relationship to the Lord as it is expressed in the way in which we administer the wealth of earthly possessions He has entrusted to us. This is what many people fail to understand. Jesus' death on the cross in our stead does not mean that our lives have become our own, or that what we possess would not be on loan to us. We still owe ourselves and all that is ours to the Lord, and we demonstrate that by dedicating our tithes to Him as a minimum.

The basic difference between Aaron's support and the support of the Lord's servants in the New Testament dispensation is that Aaron benefited from the fact that the people were sinners and that the only way to receive pardon was to bring the required sacrifice. He received a portion of both the sin offerings and the freewill offerings. The Lord's servants of today do no longer thrive on the payments sinners have to make for their sins.

As was to be expected, the priests, being sinners themselves, did not always see what was coming to them as a payment from the Lord; some of them looked to the people for their support, and some even became totally corrupt in the way they handled their responsibilities. We read about Hophni and Phinehas, the sons of Eli that they were wicked people, who were only interested in what they could get out of the service of the Lord. Samuel reports: "Now it was the practice of the priests with the people that whenever anyone offered a sacrifice and while the meat was being boiled, the servant of the priest would come with a three-pronged fork in his hand. He would plunge it into the pan or kettle or caldron or pot, and the priest would take for himself whatever the fork brought up. This is how they treated all the Israelites who came to Shiloh. But even before the fat was burned, the servant of the priest would come and say to the man who was sacrificing, 'Give the priest some meat to roast; he won't accept boiled meat from you, but only raw.' If the man said to him, 'Let the fat be burned up first, and then take whatever you want,' the servant would then answer, 'No, hand it over now; if you don't, I'll take it by force.' "[ 16 ]

In order to help Aaron and his family remember the holiness of their charge the Lord ordered them to eat the meals that were provided by the sacrifices in "the most holy place." The NIV does not bring this out in the rendering: "Eat it as something most holy." Most other translations, such as the RSV, say: "In a most holy place shall you eat of it." TLB says: "They are to be eaten only in a most holy place, and only by males." The Pulpit Commentary says about the phrase, "In the most holy place thou shalt eat it": "This expression is somewhat perplexing, because it stands commonly for the holy of holies (Exod. xxvi. 33). As it cannot possibly have that meaning here, two interpretations have been proposed. 1. That it means in the court of the tabernacle, called 'the holy place' in Levit. vi. 16,26; vii. 6, and there specified as the only place in which the meat offerings, the sin offerings, and trespass offerings might be eaten. There is no reason why this court should not be called 'most holy,' as well as 'holy;' if it was 'holy' with respect to the camp, or the holy city, it was 'most holy' with respect to all without the camp, or without the gate. 2. That the expression does not mean 'in the most holy place,' but 'amongst the most holy things,' as it does in ch. iv. 4, and above in ver. 9. a distinction is clearly intended between the 'most holy things,' which only the priests and their sons might eat, and the 'holy things,' of which the rest of their families might partake also. It is difficult to decide between these renderings, although there can be no doubt that the 'most holy' things were actually to be consumed within the tabernacle precincts." The danger that "familiarity breeds contempt" is ever present, and we do well to cultivate our sense of awe about all things divine, lest we lose the fear of the Lord in our lives.

The items to be eaten at this secluded place are specified in vs. 9. We read that God said to Aaron: "You are to have the part of the most holy offerings that is kept from the fire. From all the gifts they bring me as most holy offerings, whether grain or sin or guilt offerings, that part belongs to you and your sons." The Pulpit Commentary says here: "The burnt offering is not mentioned because it was wholly consumed, and only the skin fell to the priest. The sin offerings for the priest or for the congregation were also wholly consumed (Levit. iv. 12, 21), but the sin offerings of private individuals, although in no case partaken of by the offerers, were available for the priests (Levit. vi. 26), and this was the ordinary case."

Beginning with vs. 11 we find another list of what befell the priests and that could be consumed by the all the members of his family, which means that they could be taken out of the tabernacle to the priest's home. Here The Pulpit Commentary writes: "The included (1) all wave offerings, especially the wave breast and heave shoulder of the peace offerings; (2) all first-fruits of every kind; (3) all that was devoted; (4) all the first-born, or their substitutes. The first and third must have been very variable in amount, but the second and fourth, if honestly rendered, must have brought in a vast amount both of produce and of revenue." We may conclude from the above that God provided for His servants in a very generous way; He did not expect them "to live on a shoestring."

Matthew Henry's Commentary says about the provisions for the Levites and the priests: "That they had not only a good table kept for them, but money likewise in their pockets for the redemption of the first-born, and those firstlings of cattle which might not be offered in sacrifice. Thus their maintenance was such as left them altogether disentangled from the affairs of this life; they had no grounds to occupy, no land to till, no vineyards to dress, no cattle to tend, no visible estate to take care of, and yet had a more plentiful income than any other families whatsoever. Thus God ordered it that they might be the more entirely addicted to their ministry, and not diverted from it, nor disturbed in it, by any worldly care or business (the ministry requires a whole man); and that they might be examples of living by faith, not only in God's providence, but in his ordinance. They lived from hand to mouth, that they might learn to take no thought for the morrow; sufficient for the day would be the provision thereof: and they had no estates to leave their children, that they might by faith leave their children, that they might by faith leave them to the care of that God who had fed them all their lives long."

This brings up the interesting topic of what we can expect if we serve the Lord and trust Him for our sustenance. Jesus says to those who serve God instead of "Mammon," that they should live one day at the time, and that there is no need to worry whether God will fulfill His obligations to us. In Matthew's Gospel we read these words: "Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes? Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life? And why do you worry about clothes? See how the lilies of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? So do not worry, saying, 'What shall we eat?' or 'What shall we drink?' or 'What shall we wear?' For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own."[ 17 ]

On the other hand, Jesus considered Himself homeless, and went often without food. At one time He said: "Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head.[ 18 ] And sometimes His heavenly Father denied Him breakfast, like in the incident Matthew reports: "Early in the morning, as he was on his way back to the city, he was hungry. Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves. Then he said to it, 'May you never bear fruit again!' Immediately the tree withered."[ 19 ]

We have to bear in mind that the priests were well provided for as long as the whole nation of Israel was faithful in following the Lord. At times when they turned away from God, and began worshipping idols, when the temple worship fell in discredit, the priest were reduced to poverty. The servant of the Lord in our present day may discover, though, that God can provide in spite of the apostasy of the ones who are supposed to provide.

It is important to strike the right balance in the remuneration of the Lord's servants between extreme poverty and lavishness. The Lord gives us certain guarantees regarding our basic needs if serve Him. In our own experience He has gone well beyond supplying for basic needs alone. If we lose sight of the fact that the Lord is our riches, and we begin to look around to fix our attention upon material things, we are in danger of losing out. God says to us, what He said to Aaron: "I am your share and your inheritance among the Israelites." God can teach us the secret He taught Paul, who said: "I know what it is to be in need, and I know what it is to have plenty. I have learned the secret of being content in any and every situation, whether well fed or hungry, whether living in plenty or in want. I can do everything through him who gives me strength."[ 20 ]

When God says in the verses 12 and 13: "I give you all the finest olive oil and all the finest new wine and grain they give the LORD as the firstfruits of their harvest. All the land's firstfruits that they bring to the LORD will be yours," He is, obviously, talking about the time when Israel enters the promised land. Considering the situation in which these words were spoken, that is somewhere during the period of the forty-year's wandering through the desert, at which the only prospect the people had was death, these words are like a trumpet blast that shatter the silence of death. At this point Aaron did not know yet that entrance into Canaan would be denied to him also.[ 21 ] The other Levites, however, knew that they would die before the forty years were finished. So in this command God wants the priests and Levites to look over the horizon of their own lives into the future. This must have given them a strange sense of awareness of the difference between God's perspective and man's. In the midst of an arid desert God speaks about "the finest olive oil and all the finest new wine and grain … [and] the firstfruits of [the] harvest." In the midst of death and dying, God speaks about life.

The command about the first-born also, speaks of life. People and animals are born in this wilderness. The aimlessness and despair that marked the desert journey is interrupted, over and over again, by the miracle of birth.

Adam Clarke has an interesting description of a rite in the Jewish synagogue, as it was performed in the nineteenth century, that is based on this passage in Numbers. We copy: "[Shalt thou redeem, according to thine estimation, for the money of five shekels] Redemption of the first-born is one of the rites which is still practiced among the Jews. According to Leo of Modena, it is performed in the following manner:-- When the child is thirty days old, the father sends for one of the descendants of Aaron: several persons being assembled on the occasion, the father brings a cup containing several pieces of gold and silver coin. The priest then takes the child into his arms, and addressing himself to the mother, says: Is this thy son?-- MOTHER. Yes.-- PRIEST. Hast thou never had another child male or female, a miscarriage or untimely birth?-- MOTHER. No.-- PRIEST. This being the case, this child, as first-born, belongs to me. Then, turning to the father, he says: If it be thy desire to have this child, thou must redeem it.-- FATHER. I present thee with this gold and silver for this purpose.-- PRIEST. Thou dost wish, therefore, to redeem the child?-- FATHER. I do wish so to do.-- The priest then, turning himself to the assembly, says: Very well; this child, as first-born, is mine, as it is written in Bemidbar, <Num. 18:16>, Thou shalt redeem the first-born of a month old for five shekels, but I shall content myself with this in exchange. He then takes two gold crowns, or thereabouts, and returns the child to his parents."

The evaluation price for a child had already been fixed in Leviticus. We read there: "If it is a person between one month and five years, set the value of a male at five shekels of silver and that of a female at three shekels of silver."[ 22 ] But this evaluation was not linked to the redemption of a first-born son. The Good News Bible translates the verse with: "Children shall be bought back at the age of one month for the fixed price of five pieces of silver, according to the official standard." Converting the shekel into US currency, TLB says: "There must be a payment of two and a half dollars made for each firstborn child." The fixation of this price in modern currency is, of course, quite arbitrary, but it gives us an idea of how much money could be involved. It was, obviously, not a huge sum. But many small payments add up to a sizable amount. The Pulpit Commentary says: "It is extremely difficult to estimate the number of first-born, but it is evident that in any case a large income must have accrued to the priest in this way."

Matthew Henry's Commentary gives the following remarks and applications to the remuneration to the priest: "1. That much of the provision that was made for them arose out of the sacrifices which they themselves were employed to offer. They had the skins of almost all the sacrifices, which they might sell, and they had a considerable share out of the meat-offerings, sin-offerings, etc. Those that had the charge of the offerings had the benefit, v. 8. Note, God's work is its own wages, and his service carries its recompense along with it. Even in keeping God's commandments there is great reward. The present pleasures of religion are part of its pay. 2. That they had not only a good table kept for them, but money likewise in their pockets for the redemption of the first-born, and those firstlings of cattle which might not be offered in sacrifice. Thus their maintenance was such as left them altogether disentangled from the affairs of this life; they had no grounds to occupy, no land to till, no vineyards to dress, no cattle to tend, no visible estate to take care of, and yet had a more plentiful income than any other families whatsoever. Thus God ordered it that they might be the more entirely addicted to their ministry, and not diverted from it, nor disturbed in it, by any worldly care or business (the ministry requires a whole man); and that they might be examples of living by faith, not only in God's providence, but in his ordinance. They lived from hand to mouth, that they might learn to take no thought for the morrow; sufficient for the day would be the provision thereof: and they had no estates to leave their children, that they might by faith leave their children, that they might by faith leave them to the care of that God who had fed them all their lives long."

In a sense the money paid to redeem a first-born child was blood money. In the case of a first-born animal we read: "But you must not redeem the firstborn of an ox, a sheep or a goat; they are holy. Sprinkle their blood on the altar and burn their fat as an offering made by fire, an aroma pleasing to the LORD." The five shekels represented the child's blood. Since the child was the bearer of his Creator's image, his blood could not be spilled, but because of the fact that he was born from human sinful parents, he had forfeited his life the moment he entered this world. Although we read that the offering of a first-born clean animal was "an aroma pleasing to the LORD," this did not mean that God was blood thirsty. Death is as much against God's nature as it is against ours. What was pleasing to God was not the death of the animal, but the reminder of the death of His Son, who would show His love for the Father and for mankind fallen into sin, by dying in their stead. God must have as many conflicting emotions about this subject as we do. The greatest satisfaction must have been in the fact that because of the substitution of one creature by another, man could be saved from death.

Also, this law on the first-born contains a promise of victory over death in the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. Paul says about our Lord's resurrection: "But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep."[ 23 ] In the Apostolic Confession of Nicea Christ is called "the first-born of the dead." The ministry of a priest in the Old Testament consisted of a strange mixture of death and life. His own life was in danger because of the fact that he moved about on holy precincts, but in the daily sacrifices of animals he saved the lives of numerous people who would otherwise have died because of their sins.

In laying down these rules for the sustenance of the priests, the Lord says: "It is an everlasting covenant of salt before the LORD for both you and your offspring." The Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary comments on this: "[It is a covenant of salt]-- i. e., a perpetual ordinance. This figurative form of expression was evidently founded on the conservative properties of salt, which keeps meat from corruption; and hence, it became an emblem of inviolability and permanence. It is a common phrase among Oriental people, who consider the eating of salt a pledge of fidelity, binding there in a covenant of friendship; and hence, the partaking of the altar meats, which were appropriated to the priests on condition of their services, and of which salt formed a necessary accompaniment, was naturally called a covenant of salt <Lev. 2:13>."

The translation "covenant of salt" reads in Hebrew b^ariyt melach. B^ariyt comes from beriyth which is used, according to Strongs Definitions: "in the sense of cutting … a compact (because made by passing between pieces of flesh)." We see this concept of a covenant illustrated in the encounter between God and Abraham. We read in Genesis: "So the LORD said to him, 'Bring me a heifer, a goat and a ram, each three years old, along with a dove and a young pigeon.' Abram brought all these to him, cut them in two and arranged the halves opposite each other; the birds, however, he did not cut in half…. When the sun had set and darkness had fallen, a smoking firepot with a blazing torch appeared and passed between the pieces. On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram and said, 'To your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates….' "[ 24 ]

According to Abijah the monarchy of the house of David was based on such a covenant. He sent a message to king Jeroboam of Israel, saying: "Don't you know that the LORD, the God of Israel, has given the kingship of Israel to David and his descendants forever by a covenant of salt?"

We know, of course, that this "everlasting covenant of salt" concerning the support of the priests no longer exists. The priesthood, as it existed from the time of the giving of the law till the beginning of the Christian era, has disappeared. We understand that the covenant dealing with the monarchy of David is perpetuated in the person of Jesus Christ. We may assume that the same is true, at least in a spiritual sense, about the covenant regarding the sustenance of the priests. But it is more difficult to follow this line from the nation of Israel into the Church of Christ.

In vs. 20 we come to the core of this chapter. "The LORD said to Aaron, 'You will have no inheritance in their land, nor will you have any share among them; I am your share and your inheritance among the Israelites.' " These words cut through the images with which human life is surrounded to the reality they represent. There used to be a time when all paper money issued by a government was backed up by a reserve of gold. The bills only had value because of the presence of this gold. This gold standard was dropped in the early thirties of the twentieth century. God wanted the Israelites to know that their earthly possessions were only images of God's glory. If God does not back up what we call our own, our possessions are worthless. What we call riches is temporary and illusionary. Real riches is not expressed in dollar signs. The person who has God as his inheritance is richer than the riches billionaire. In essence God says to Aaron: "I do not give you the paper money, but I give you the gold."

Man's vision is nowhere as distorted as on the point of possessions. We tend to see money, not in terms of means to have lodging and sustenance, but as security and power, and therefore we reach for it and try to amass it where we can. The devil knows how to manipulate human greed very cleverly. The Apostle Paul gives some very pertinent and realistic warnings on the subject. To Timothy he wrote: "For we brought nothing into the world, and we can take nothing out of it. But if we have food and clothing, we will be content with that. People who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge men into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs."[ 25 ] The love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, both of capitalism as well as communism. The Scottish writer George MacDonald says in his book Fairy Tales: "Do you believe God can punish someone by making him rich? I believe He can." Most people are eager to take this punishment without thinking of the consequences.

God wanted Aaron and his fellow Levites to live by faith. This thought evokes almost automatically images of people who have to scrape the bottom to make ends meet. As we have seen before, it meant for the priests and Levites a generous allowance of food and money, but it would never make them millionaires.

Adam Clarke does not enter into the spiritual ramifications of the text but he gives a very clear indication what the priests' provisions amounted to in practice. We read: "The principal part of what was offered to God was the portion of the priests, therefore they had no inheritance of land in Israel; independently of that they had a very ample provision for their support. The rabbis say twenty-four gifts were given to the priests, and they are all expressed in the law. Eight of those gifts the priests ate nowhere but in the sanctuary: these eight are the following:--

1. The flesh of the SIN-OFFERING, whether of beasts or fowls, <Lev. 6:25-26>

2. The flesh of the TRESPASS-OFFERING, <Lev. 7:1,6>

3. The PEACE-OFFERINGS of the congregation, <Lev. 23:19-20>

4. The remainder of the OMER or SHEAF, <Lev. 23:10>, etc.

5. The remnants of the MEAT-OFFERINGS of the Israelites, <Lev. 6:16>

6. The two LOAVES, <Lev. 23:17>

7. The SHEW-BREAD, <Lev. 24:9>

8. The LOG OF OIL offered by the leper, <Lev. 14:10>, etc.

Five of those gifts they ate only in Jerusalem:--

1. The breast and shoulder of the PEACE-OFFERINGS, <Lev. 7:31,34>

2. The HEAVE-OFFERING of the sacrifice of confession, <Lev. 7:12-14>

3. The HEAVE-OFFERING of the Nazarite's ram, <Lev. 6:17-20>

4. The FIRSTLING of the clean beast, <Num. 18:15; Deut. 15:19-20>

5. The FIRST-FRUITS, <Num. 18:13>

FIVE gifts were not due unto them by the law, but in the land of Israel only:

1. The heave-offering or FIRST-FRUITS, <Num. 18:12>

2. The heave-offering of the TITHE, <Num. 18:28>

3. The CAKE, <Num. 15:20>. These three were holy.

4. The first-fruits of the FLEECE, <Deut. 18:4>

5. The FIELD of POSSESSION, <Num. 35>. These two were common.

FIVE gifts were due unto them both within and without the land:

1. The gifts of the BEASTS SLAIN, <Deut. 18:3>

2. The redemption of the FIRST-BORN SON, <Num. 18:15>

3. The LAMB for the firstling of an ass, <Exo. 4:20; Num. 18>

4. The restitution of that taken by violence from a stranger, <Num. 5:8>

6. All DEVOTED things, <Num. 18:14>

ONE gift was due unto them from the sanctuary:

1. The skins of the burnt-offering, and all the skins of the other most holy things, <Lev. 7:8>. In all, 24. See Ainsworth.

The gifts which the females of the priests' families had a part in were these:

1. The heave-offering, or first-fruits.

2. The heave-offering of the tithe.

3. The cake.

4. The gifts of the beast, <Deut. 18:3>

5. The first of the fleece.-- See the Mishnah, Tract. Biccurim, and Ainsworth on the Pentateuch.

Besides all this the priests had the tribute money mentioned <Num. 31:28-29>."

Moses repeats the injunction in Deuteronomy, where we read: "The priests, who are Levites-- indeed the whole tribe of Levi-- are to have no allotment or inheritance with Israel. They shall live on the offerings made to the LORD by fire, for that is their inheritance. They shall have no inheritance among their brothers; the LORD is their inheritance, as he promised them."[ 26 ]

The Pulpit Commentary remarks beautifully: "This is not to be explained away, as if it meant only that they were to live 'of the altar.' Just as the priests (and in a lesser sense all the Levites) were the special possession of the Lord, so the Lord was the special possession of the priests; and inasmuch as the whole earth belonged to him, the portion of the priests was, potentially in all cases, actually for those who were capable of realizing it, infinitely more desirable than any other portion. The spiritual meaning of the promise was so clearly felt that is was constantly claimed by the devout in Israel, irrespective of their ecclesiastical status (cf. Ps. xvi. 5; Lam. iii. 24, &c.)."

This is one of the great truths of the Bible: If we belong to God, He belongs to us. God surrenders Himself just as much to us as we do to Him. Our love relationship with God is a bond of marriage in the truest sense of the word. If we serve God, He serves us. Jesus said: "The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."[ 27 ] If we honor God, He will honor us: "My Father will honor the one who serves me."[ 28 ] If God is Lord of our lives, we are the richest people in the world, and also the happiest, the most fulfilled. The priests and Levites served the Lord in the tabernacle, and put their lives at stake on a daily basis, yet they received the greatest guarantee and security a person can have in this world: the Lord was their inheritance.

It is easy to calculate that if the Levites received the tithes of all the tribes of Israel, they, being one out of thirteen tribes, would receive a more than average income. Besides this, they also received parts of the offerings which were not included in the tithes. If the Israelites were faithful in tithing, this would give them a very comfortable living allowance.

The verses 26-32 command that the Levites, who receive the tithes of the people, give their tithes in turn to the Lord. God wants them to remember that He has a claim to all their possession also, and, therefore, they have to tithe their income. The elevated position of the Levites made them prone to believe that they would be above the law, and that they were not accountable to God. The tithes would be an antidote against the corruption of power. In Jesus' days, the leaders of the people managed to turn the tables, and use tithing as a reason to affirm their position in society. In telling the story of the Pharisee and the tax collector.: Jesus said: "The Pharisee stood up and prayed about himself: 'God, I thank you that I am not like other men-- robbers, evildoers, adulterers-- or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.' "[ 29 ]

Vs. 32 is interesting in this regard. The Lord says: "By presenting the best part of it you will not be guilty in this matter; then you will not defile the holy offerings of the Israelites, and you will not die." The Levites had to realize that the people's tithes were not given to them but to the Lord. God put them in charge of the offerings, but the offerings did not belong to them. They were rewarded generously, but the were not the primary recipients.

For some people it is hard to receive gifts; others act as if they have a right to charity. The arrangements God made for the Levites dealt with both problems. In tithing of what they received, the Levites recognized God's claim. It was not their right to receive, it was God's. To those who had a problem living of charity, He said: "'When you present the best part, it will be reckoned to you as the product of the threshing floor or the winepress. You and your households may eat the rest of it anywhere, for it is your wages for your work at the Tent of Meeting."

For the Levites tithing, was a matter of life and death. If they would not tithe they defiled the holy offerings of the Israelites, and they forfeited their lives. The Lord said: "By presenting the best part of it you will not be guilty in this matter; then you will not defile the holy offerings of the Israelites, and you will not die." This shows us how important it is to keep the right perspective. God will hold us responsible for what we do with everything He entrusts to us. We will have to give account.

[ 1 ] Isa. 53:6

[ 2 ] See Lev. 10:1,2

[ 3 ] John 1:29

[ 4 ] Rom. 6:3-5

[ 5 ] Job 1:4,5

[ 6 ] Gal. 4:19,20

[ 7 ] Rom. 9:1-4

[ 8 ] See Gen. 22:1-14

[ 9 ] See Rom. 5:12-21

[ 10 ] Rom. 8:36, see also Ps. 44:22

[ 11 ] Acts 21:13

[ 12 ] Heb. 13:20

[ 13 ] Phil. 3:10,11

[ 14 ] I Cor. 9:13,14

[ 15 ] I Cor. 9:15,18,19

[ 16 ] I Sam. 2:13-16

[ 17 ] Matt. 6:25-34

[ 18 ] Matt. 8:20

[ 19 ] Matt. 21:18,19

[ 20 ] Phil. 4:12,13

[ 21 ] See Num. 20:12

[ 22 ] Lev. 27:6

[ 23 ] I Cor. 15:20

[ 24 ] Gen. 15:9,10,17,18

[ 25 ] I Tim. 6:7-10

[ 26 ] Deut. 18:1,2

[ 27 ] Matt. 20:28

[ 28 ] John 12:26

[ 29 ] Luke 18:11,12