Sin arising out of weakness.
Does the following sound like sin that arose out of weakness?
Rom 7:15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
Rom 7:16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
Rom 7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
Rom 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
Rom 7:19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
Rom 7:20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
Rom 7:21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
Rom 7:22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
Rom 7:23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
Rom 7:24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
Rom 7:25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
Our FLESH is weak! We sin even when we hate sinning. Those who sin LOVING sin are doing so presumptuously. We talked about this yesterday but it bears repeating.
Today we are going to go over things we've already gone over, but we need to review them. We need to understand that there are those out there who would love nothing better than to twist the truth into deception and they'll do it by tweaking something small so that it's not noticed. To take away the truth of the Sanctuary and it's cleansing, is to strip away God's truth for the last days, for those who will stand in the very end of time.
By the grace of our Lord and Savior may we LEARN this truth, LOVE this truth, all which is of our SAVIOR!
Please, Lord, save us!
*******
1989 Special 2 -- Light From the Throne -- Part 2 --
The most important service performed in the daily ministration of the sanctuary rituals was that performed in behalf of individuals the sin offerings.
The sin offering did not relate to sin or sinfulness in general, but to a particular manifestation. "If a soul should sin through ignorance" (IN ERROR), prefaced the explanation of the law of sin offerings (Lev. 4:2)
These were sins which arose out of the weaknesses of the flesh.
Those committed with a high hand, that is, "presumptuously," were to be punished by extermination. The offender was to be "utterly cut off." (Num. 15:28-31)
The appeal of the Gospel was based upon the superior ministration of Jesus Christ because "through this Man is preached unto you forgiveness of sins: and by Him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses." (Acts 13:38-39)
Jesus Himself declared that there was only one sin which could not and would not be forgiven "in this world" nor "in the world to come" and that was the sin of "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit." (Matt. 12:31-32)
While the law of the sin and trespass offerings are one (Lev. 7:7), the steps of the ritual are given only for the sin offerings. (Lev. 4)
It is through this outline that we catch glimpses of the reality of the provision made for man to receive victory over the sin problem.
The sin offerings pertained to two categories of sin - corporate and individual - and to two groups in each category; namely, the high priest in his official capacity and the entire congregation; the rulers and the ordinary individuals.
It was under the category of "ruler" that the priests as individuals were covered. In Numbers 3:32, the word translated, "chief" (nasi) is the same as translated "ruler" in Lev. 4:22.
In the sin offerings, the kind of animal sacrificed, the disposition of the blood, and the status of the priest who ministered, DIFFERED depending whether the sin was CORPORATE OR INDIVIDUAL .
Being a burnt offering, rules governing the basic burnt offering as first outlined in Leviticus applied. It was to be offered "at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation." (Lev. 1:3; 4:4)
The offerer was to place his hand upon the head of the sacrifice. (Lev. 1:4; 4:24)
The sacrificial animal was to be "accepted for him to make atonement for him." (Lev. 1:4; 4:26)
In each instance, the one bringing the sacrifice, slew the animal. (Lev.1:5; 4:29)
The first category of corporate guilt concerned the High Priest, the spiritual leader of the people. The instruction was that "if the anointed priest sins, bringing guilt on the people" (Lev. 4:3 NKJV), he was to bring a bullock, the largest of all the sacrificial animals, and equal to that required for the whole congregation. (Lev. 4:3,14)
While the priest brought the offering as a corporate individual, he ministered the sacrifice in his office as high priest. (4:4-5)
The blood was brought into the sanctuary and sprinkled seven times before "the vail of the sanctuary."
It was fingerprinted "upon the horns of the altar of sweet incense before the Lord," and the remainder of the blood was poured at the base of the altar of the court. (4:6-7)
The fat was removed from the inwards, the kidneys and the folds above the liver. The fat and the kidneys were burned upon the Altar of Burnt Offering. (4:8-10) The rest - "the whole bullock" - was carried "without the camp" and there burned." (4:12)
The same procedure was to be followed when the whole congregation sinned. (4:13-21)
Note again - it was the high priest who ministered the sacrifice, and the blood was brought into the sanctuary. It is important to note these two basics in the law of the sin offering. These applied to corporate sin; INDIVIDUAL SIN WAS DEALT WITH DIFFERENTLY.
When a ruler or a "common" person sinned, the sacrificial animal became a GOAT instead of a BULLOCK.
Three other distinct differences need to be noted.
For the individual, be he a ruler or a common person, one of the sub-priests ministered the sacrifice.
The blood was NOT taken into the sanctuary, and the whole animal was NOT burned without the camp. Instead, the blood of the sacrifice was placed on the horns of the altar of the court, and the balance of the blood poured at the base of the altar. (4:22-26)
The officiating priest was to eat of the victim in the court, designated in this instance as a "holy place." (Lev. 6:25-26)
This was explained by Moses to mean that by this act these common priests were to "bear the iniquity" of the individual members of the congregation "to make atonement for them before the Lord." (Lev. 10:17-18)
The result to the individual and to the congregation as a whole of the mediation of the sin offering was FORGIVENESS. (4:20, 26, 31) Only in the case of the high priest, when he sinned in such a way as to cause guilt to come upon the whole congregation, is it omitted that forgiveness resulted.
The significance of this difference in the mediating of forgiveness needs to be pondered long by those who stand as spiritual guardians of the people.
The record of confession was marked on the horns of the altar of incense, but how God related to it in type, and how He will relate in reality is not given.
Christ spoke fearful woes upon the spiritual leaders of His day who caused the people to reject truth. (Matt. 23:13-33)
The lessons and glimpses of the Reality as revealed in the Law of the Sin Offering need to be carefully considered.
WHAT WAS TRANSFERRED? --
Basic to salvation is transference. We cannot pay a penalty for our sins and live.
What, then, was transferred when in the sanctuary ritual, the sinner placed his hand upon the head of the sacrifice he brought to the door of the tabernacle?
This is no idle question. It was over this question that E. J. Waggoner stumbled. A letter was found on his desk after his sudden death, May 28, 1916, which he wanted the one to whom it was written to consider it "as a confession of faith."
In it he wrote: The self-evident truth that sin is not an entity but a condition that can exist only in a person, made it clear to me that it is impossible for there to be any such thing as the transferring of sins to the sanctuary in heaven, thus defiling that place; and that there could, consequently, be any such thing, either in 1844 A.D., or at any subsequent time, as the "cleansing of the sanctuary." (The Confession of Faith, p. 14)
It can be seen that the question as to WHAT was transferred in the typical sanctuary ritual has been a source of contention in the teaching of the sanctuary truth.
Actually, there was and is NO NEED for the transference of sin to the sanctuary, whether in type or Heavenly Reality.
As we noted in the previous Commentary , all sin the moment committed is recorded in "books", or in modern terminology, a "computer bank." (III-1, p. 6, col. 2)
The very inference of the language used in outlining the sin offering ritual indicates the recording of the sin committed. The law reads - "If his sin, wherein he hath sinned, come to his knowledge." (Lev., 4:23, 28) The fact of sin preceded the perception of that sin. When perceived, it was not the recording of the sin that the sinner needed, but the means to escape from the penalty of the sin. (((TRUTH))))
Review the steps outlined in the model for one category. When the common person became conscious of his sin, he brought the designated animal. Putting his hand upon the head of the victim, he confessed "that he hath sinned in that thing." (Lev. 5:5)
The sacrificial animal was "accepted for him to make an atonement for him." (Lev. 1:4)
What did the atonement require? DEATH!
Life had to be forfeited, for the wages of sin is death. (Rom. 6:23)
The sinner slew the animal. The blood, which "is the life of all flesh" (Lev. 17:14), was taken by the priest and fingerprinted on the Altar in the court.
This record is saying loud and clear, the PENALTY HAD BEEN PAID.
CONFESSION had been made; therefore, FORGIVENESS can be extended to the transgressor.
This is exactly what the law of the sin offering stated - "and the priest shall make an atonement for him, and it shall be forgiven him." (4:31, 35)
It does not say that the priest shall make an atonement for him and record his sin. What salvation would that be?
"The offerer transferred the consciousness of sin and the desire for forgiveness to the head of the animal that had been brought in is stead, by the laying on of his hand; and after this the animal was slaughtered, and suffered death for him as the wages of sin." (Keil-Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament, Vol. I, p. 305) Thus the record of sin already there is offset by the fact that thee penalty has been paid for by some other living creature.
*******
To be continued- by the grace of our LORD.
Does the following sound like sin that arose out of weakness?
Rom 7:15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
Rom 7:16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
Rom 7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
Rom 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
Rom 7:19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
Rom 7:20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
Rom 7:21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
Rom 7:22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
Rom 7:23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
Rom 7:24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
Rom 7:25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
Our FLESH is weak! We sin even when we hate sinning. Those who sin LOVING sin are doing so presumptuously. We talked about this yesterday but it bears repeating.
Today we are going to go over things we've already gone over, but we need to review them. We need to understand that there are those out there who would love nothing better than to twist the truth into deception and they'll do it by tweaking something small so that it's not noticed. To take away the truth of the Sanctuary and it's cleansing, is to strip away God's truth for the last days, for those who will stand in the very end of time.
By the grace of our Lord and Savior may we LEARN this truth, LOVE this truth, all which is of our SAVIOR!
Please, Lord, save us!
*******
1989 Special 2 -- Light From the Throne -- Part 2 --
The most important service performed in the daily ministration of the sanctuary rituals was that performed in behalf of individuals the sin offerings.
The sin offering did not relate to sin or sinfulness in general, but to a particular manifestation. "If a soul should sin through ignorance" (IN ERROR), prefaced the explanation of the law of sin offerings (Lev. 4:2)
These were sins which arose out of the weaknesses of the flesh.
Those committed with a high hand, that is, "presumptuously," were to be punished by extermination. The offender was to be "utterly cut off." (Num. 15:28-31)
The appeal of the Gospel was based upon the superior ministration of Jesus Christ because "through this Man is preached unto you forgiveness of sins: and by Him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses." (Acts 13:38-39)
Jesus Himself declared that there was only one sin which could not and would not be forgiven "in this world" nor "in the world to come" and that was the sin of "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit." (Matt. 12:31-32)
While the law of the sin and trespass offerings are one (Lev. 7:7), the steps of the ritual are given only for the sin offerings. (Lev. 4)
It is through this outline that we catch glimpses of the reality of the provision made for man to receive victory over the sin problem.
The sin offerings pertained to two categories of sin - corporate and individual - and to two groups in each category; namely, the high priest in his official capacity and the entire congregation; the rulers and the ordinary individuals.
It was under the category of "ruler" that the priests as individuals were covered. In Numbers 3:32, the word translated, "chief" (nasi) is the same as translated "ruler" in Lev. 4:22.
In the sin offerings, the kind of animal sacrificed, the disposition of the blood, and the status of the priest who ministered, DIFFERED depending whether the sin was CORPORATE OR INDIVIDUAL .
Being a burnt offering, rules governing the basic burnt offering as first outlined in Leviticus applied. It was to be offered "at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation." (Lev. 1:3; 4:4)
The offerer was to place his hand upon the head of the sacrifice. (Lev. 1:4; 4:24)
The sacrificial animal was to be "accepted for him to make atonement for him." (Lev. 1:4; 4:26)
In each instance, the one bringing the sacrifice, slew the animal. (Lev.1:5; 4:29)
The first category of corporate guilt concerned the High Priest, the spiritual leader of the people. The instruction was that "if the anointed priest sins, bringing guilt on the people" (Lev. 4:3 NKJV), he was to bring a bullock, the largest of all the sacrificial animals, and equal to that required for the whole congregation. (Lev. 4:3,14)
While the priest brought the offering as a corporate individual, he ministered the sacrifice in his office as high priest. (4:4-5)
The blood was brought into the sanctuary and sprinkled seven times before "the vail of the sanctuary."
It was fingerprinted "upon the horns of the altar of sweet incense before the Lord," and the remainder of the blood was poured at the base of the altar of the court. (4:6-7)
The fat was removed from the inwards, the kidneys and the folds above the liver. The fat and the kidneys were burned upon the Altar of Burnt Offering. (4:8-10) The rest - "the whole bullock" - was carried "without the camp" and there burned." (4:12)
The same procedure was to be followed when the whole congregation sinned. (4:13-21)
Note again - it was the high priest who ministered the sacrifice, and the blood was brought into the sanctuary. It is important to note these two basics in the law of the sin offering. These applied to corporate sin; INDIVIDUAL SIN WAS DEALT WITH DIFFERENTLY.
When a ruler or a "common" person sinned, the sacrificial animal became a GOAT instead of a BULLOCK.
Three other distinct differences need to be noted.
For the individual, be he a ruler or a common person, one of the sub-priests ministered the sacrifice.
The blood was NOT taken into the sanctuary, and the whole animal was NOT burned without the camp. Instead, the blood of the sacrifice was placed on the horns of the altar of the court, and the balance of the blood poured at the base of the altar. (4:22-26)
The officiating priest was to eat of the victim in the court, designated in this instance as a "holy place." (Lev. 6:25-26)
This was explained by Moses to mean that by this act these common priests were to "bear the iniquity" of the individual members of the congregation "to make atonement for them before the Lord." (Lev. 10:17-18)
The result to the individual and to the congregation as a whole of the mediation of the sin offering was FORGIVENESS. (4:20, 26, 31) Only in the case of the high priest, when he sinned in such a way as to cause guilt to come upon the whole congregation, is it omitted that forgiveness resulted.
The significance of this difference in the mediating of forgiveness needs to be pondered long by those who stand as spiritual guardians of the people.
The record of confession was marked on the horns of the altar of incense, but how God related to it in type, and how He will relate in reality is not given.
Christ spoke fearful woes upon the spiritual leaders of His day who caused the people to reject truth. (Matt. 23:13-33)
The lessons and glimpses of the Reality as revealed in the Law of the Sin Offering need to be carefully considered.
WHAT WAS TRANSFERRED? --
Basic to salvation is transference. We cannot pay a penalty for our sins and live.
What, then, was transferred when in the sanctuary ritual, the sinner placed his hand upon the head of the sacrifice he brought to the door of the tabernacle?
This is no idle question. It was over this question that E. J. Waggoner stumbled. A letter was found on his desk after his sudden death, May 28, 1916, which he wanted the one to whom it was written to consider it "as a confession of faith."
In it he wrote: The self-evident truth that sin is not an entity but a condition that can exist only in a person, made it clear to me that it is impossible for there to be any such thing as the transferring of sins to the sanctuary in heaven, thus defiling that place; and that there could, consequently, be any such thing, either in 1844 A.D., or at any subsequent time, as the "cleansing of the sanctuary." (The Confession of Faith, p. 14)
It can be seen that the question as to WHAT was transferred in the typical sanctuary ritual has been a source of contention in the teaching of the sanctuary truth.
Actually, there was and is NO NEED for the transference of sin to the sanctuary, whether in type or Heavenly Reality.
As we noted in the previous Commentary , all sin the moment committed is recorded in "books", or in modern terminology, a "computer bank." (III-1, p. 6, col. 2)
The very inference of the language used in outlining the sin offering ritual indicates the recording of the sin committed. The law reads - "If his sin, wherein he hath sinned, come to his knowledge." (Lev., 4:23, 28) The fact of sin preceded the perception of that sin. When perceived, it was not the recording of the sin that the sinner needed, but the means to escape from the penalty of the sin. (((TRUTH))))
Review the steps outlined in the model for one category. When the common person became conscious of his sin, he brought the designated animal. Putting his hand upon the head of the victim, he confessed "that he hath sinned in that thing." (Lev. 5:5)
The sacrificial animal was "accepted for him to make an atonement for him." (Lev. 1:4)
What did the atonement require? DEATH!
Life had to be forfeited, for the wages of sin is death. (Rom. 6:23)
The sinner slew the animal. The blood, which "is the life of all flesh" (Lev. 17:14), was taken by the priest and fingerprinted on the Altar in the court.
This record is saying loud and clear, the PENALTY HAD BEEN PAID.
CONFESSION had been made; therefore, FORGIVENESS can be extended to the transgressor.
This is exactly what the law of the sin offering stated - "and the priest shall make an atonement for him, and it shall be forgiven him." (4:31, 35)
It does not say that the priest shall make an atonement for him and record his sin. What salvation would that be?
"The offerer transferred the consciousness of sin and the desire for forgiveness to the head of the animal that had been brought in is stead, by the laying on of his hand; and after this the animal was slaughtered, and suffered death for him as the wages of sin." (Keil-Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament, Vol. I, p. 305) Thus the record of sin already there is offset by the fact that thee penalty has been paid for by some other living creature.
*******
To be continued- by the grace of our LORD.
No comments:
Post a Comment