Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Leviticus 8:31-36

31 And Moses said unto Aaron and to his sons, Boil the flesh at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation: and there eat it with the bread that is in the basket of consecrations, as I commanded, saying, Aaron and his sons shall eat it.

32 And that which remaineth of the flesh and of the bread shall ye burn with fire.

33 And ye shall not go out of the door of the tabernacle of the congregation in seven days, until the days of your consecration be at an end: for seven days shall he consecrate you.

34 As he hath done this day, so the Lord hath commanded to do, to make an atonement for you.

35 Therefore shall ye abide at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation day and night seven days, and keep the charge of the Lord, that ye die not: for so I am commanded.

36 So Aaron and his sons did all things which the Lord commanded by the hand of Moses.

Presumably the instruction for Aaron and his sons eat their sacrifice portion at the door of the tabernacle is so that all of gathered Israel may be witness to the proper fulfillment of God’s command. We do not hear this being a requirement for general rituals, but at least now the Israelites would have the image in their mind of what transpires even on the times when they don’t see it.

Another thing that is unique about this initial performance of the rituals was the requirement for the priests to remain in the tabernacle for seven days, apparently on peril of death! Once Aaron and his sons had begun their consecration to the Lord, they were not to abandon the process half done. This cleansing and consecration ritual was a week-long process, one that entailed new sacrifices on each of the seven days.

Jesus pointed out in Luke 14:28-30, “For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it? Lest haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock him, Saying, This man began to build, and was not able to finish.”

So it was for the tabernacle priests. They were informed beforehand what “the cost” of being a priest was. They knew what rituals would be required, what commitments, and what restrictions. It was a good thing to be a priest, but not if they didn’t accept the cost of it. So it is for each of us as modern disciples. We have been told “the cost,” meaning the duties, the commitments, and the restrictions of bearing the name of Christ. It is a good thing to taken on his name, but not if we don’t accept that cost.

We will see in two chapters how two of Aaron’s sons did not meet the requirements of their station, defied the commandments that they had pledged to, and were destroyed because of it. We should assume no less serious of an outcome when we violate our covenants as well. We may not see such a dramatic event as being consumed by a ball of fire but never forget that even greater than the death of the body is the death of the soul.

Posted on by Abe Austin

When I Feel Like It


There are things that I know are right to do, but which I do not feel like doing right now.

But when I examine myself, I realize that I will never feel like doing them.

And if that is the case, then they can only ever be done when I do not feel like doing them.

And then, I know that I must do it now.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Leviticus 6:12-13

12 And the fire upon the altar shall be burning in it; it shall not be put out: and the priest shall burn wood on it every morning, and lay the burnt offering in order upon it; and he shall burn thereon the fat of the peace offerings.

13 The fire shall ever be burning upon the altar; it shall never go out.

Once again, we are reminded that this is meant to be a perpetual flame to the Lord, it’s light should always shine bright for all of Israel to see, probably flickering and diffused through the linen courtyard walls like a heavenly glow. Obviously, this perpetual flame is symbolic, but to properly appreciate its meanings, I think we have to acknowledge that this was not the flame of the Lord, this was the flame for the Lord.

The pillar of fire that would guide Israel in their journeys was the flame of the Lord, created and maintained by His own divine power. This fire upon the altar was created and maintained by the priests as an offering for the Lord. Thus, I would say it is not limited to representing God’s shining presence, there were other symbols for that. Arguably, it better represented our perpetual effort to reach and reconcile with God. It represented our need to make continual sacrifice to keep our fervor burning brightly. It represented the fact that our faith will go out without constant fuel.

Knowing that God will always be there for us is essential but knowing that we will always strive for Him is the next level of spiritual surety.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Leviticus 4:32-35

32 And if he bring a lamb for a sin offering, he shall bring it a female without blemish.

33 And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the sin offering, and slay it for a sin offering in the place where they kill the burnt offering.

34 And the priest shall take of the blood of the sin offering with his finger, and put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt offering, and shall pour out all the blood thereof at the bottom of the altar:

35 And he shall take away all the fat thereof, as the fat of the lamb is taken away from the sacrifice of the peace offerings; and the priest shall burn them upon the altar, according to the offerings made by fire unto the Lord: and the priest shall make an atonement for his sin that he hath committed, and it shall be forgiven him.

In addition to the option for a common Israelite to offer a young goat as a sin offering, he could also offer a lamb. The next chapter might suggest that two turtledoves or pigeons would also be an option for the very poor, though on the other hand it might be referring to a trespass offering instead.

In any case, we have now come to the end of this chapter on sin offerings. We have seen how the same pattern was to be applied to an individual, a community, a priest, and a leader. In all cases, the offeror placed his/their hand(s) upon the sacrifice, the animal was slaughtered, blood was placed on the horns, fat and kidneys were burned on the altar, and the body and dirty parts of the animal were burned outside of the camp. The only difference was whether the animal was a bullock, a goat, or a lamb.

It is interesting to note that the offering was one single animal, no matter how many people it applied to. Whether the entire congregation or a single, solitary soul, the offering was just one animal. This frustrates our common tendency to quantify sin and forgiveness in measurable terms. We have an innate desire to reduce offense to a number and be able to apply good works of equal number to “pay” for the offense. But that’s not how the patterns of the Spirit work. If it were, we would quickly become too “indebted in sin” to ever pay it off.

If there are any measurements and debts and payments, all of that is resolved in the atonement of Jesus Christ. All that remains for us, and for the ancient Israelites, is a ritualistic return to the right path. When we view these offerings as a symbol of commitment, not as a payment for sin, it makes sense why a single offering could stand in for any number of offerors.

SacrificeEligible oblationStepsExplanation
Sin offeringBullock, young goat, lambSacrifice for sin
The same pattern for an individual, community, priest, or leaderAn equal path to God for all
Hands placed on head, slaughteredAnimal takes the place of us
Blood placed on horns of the altarA heartfelt plea to the Lord for mercy
Fat and kidneys burned on altarCleansing our behavior and desire
Skin, dung, and flesh burned beyond the campThe sinful behavior purged out of us

Full table.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Commitment to the Ideal: A Richer Soil

A Difficult Requirement)

Yesterday I spoke of the trouble in having all of our relationships and commitments based purely on the attributes of the other person. If we only show love and devotion to those who love and are devoted to us, then we are not following Christ’s mandate to “bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you” (Matthew 5:44).

How do we offer such blessing, and good, and prayers, to those that are unpleasant to us. And how do we “give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver?” (2 Corinthians 9:7).

Love for the Ideal)

The answer that I have found is that we must have a love for the principle and ideal, one that is even more foundational to us than love for the individual. As I consider our society today, I see a great need for people who are not just devoted to their spouse, but to the very idea of marriage in-and-of-itself. We need people who are not just committed to taking care of their children, but who are committed to the role of fatherhood or motherhood itself. We need people who are not just supporters of their friends, but who are supporters of friendship itself.

If people loved marriage, loved parenthood, loved friendship, and loved neighborliness, then they could continue to act in those roles even when the other side of those relationships turned cold. If, instead, when companions turn from us, we abandon our relationship with them, we reveal that marriage, parenthood, friendship, and neighborliness never really meant anything to us at all. We just wanted to get, and if we couldn’t get, we wouldn’t be had.

Of course, I would advise anyone that they should marry someone that they genuinely love, and raise their kids to be people that they genuinely like, and build friendships with people that are genuinely good for them, and settle down in a neighborhood that is genuinely inviting. I believe it is right and wise to plant one’s relationships in promising ground, but sometimes the topsoil erodes, and roots must cling to something deeper if the relationship is to survive.

A Choice of Who to Be)

If one does not care whether the relationship survives after the initial excitement has worn off, then they hold a very shallow view of what it means to be a spouse, a parent, a friend, and a neighbor. They will never have a relationship of true depth and meaning. They will live petty and forgettable lives.

If, on the other hand, one remains committed to a marriage, a parent-child relationship, a friendship, and a community, through good times and bad, then that is a person whose bonds actually mean something. That is a person who is living a life of value.

At the end of the day, we are temporal, transient beings, and also the other people in our lives, so our commitment to them is naturally temporary and dynamic as well, ever shifting from moment to moment. We can, however, have a deep, abiding, and overriding commitment to an ideal. We can always believe in marriage, in fatherhood and motherhood, in friendship, and in neighborliness. We can be devoted to those ideals even when the relationship to the other person grows stale. We can continue giving of ourselves to those ideals with a passionate and cheerful heart, no matter how we feel about the person receiving on the other side. It is our commitment to the ideal that will see us through every drought and flood, every change of season, and every passing year.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Commitment to the Ideal: Transient Devotion

The Hardest Love)

One of the hardest instructions Jesus gave to his followers was that they were to love their enemies:

32 For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them.

33 And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same.

35 But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil.

Luke 6:32-33, 35

I cannot imagine a time or culture where this mandate wouldn’t go against the grain. I believe it is inherent in our humanity to value those that are good to us, and to despise those that are not.

How, then, are we meant to overcome this basic nature and live another way? It would be one thing if Jesus had said to “put up” with our enemies, or to “resentfully tolerate” them, but he didn’t. He said to love them, and that suggests having cultivated a state of mind and heart that is totally unnatural.

I could easily do an entire series that explores multiple answers to this question. For now, though, I will just take two posts to examine one way in which people fail this mandate, and one solution to that failing. The failure is this: commitment to the person, and the solution is this: commitment to the ideal.

The Failure)

I hear many times in our culture when a person expresses his love, commitment, and devotion to another person, and he gives as his reasons a positive attribute that applies to that person today. Consider these examples:

“I always listen to my wife because she believes in me when no one else does.”
“I need to be a good neighbor because they’ve always been good to me.”
“I’ll always give everything to my children because they bring me such joy.”
“I’ll always be there for my friends because they’re always there for me.”

I think statements like these are popular because they are flattering to the person in question, but they also establish a culture in which devotion is conditional. Implicit in all of these is that the speaker’s undying affection is dependent upon the other person continuing to show up in a way that is positive.

What if the wife stops believing in him? And the neighbors become indifferent? And the children make disagreeable choices? And the friends let him down in a time of need?

These statements of devotion are very transient and weak. They essentially communicate that “I will be dedicated to you, so long as you remain as someone that I like.” Unfortunately, and unsurprisingly, the behavior seems to follow the words. Even in our most sacred of mortal relationships, that of marriage, a man and a woman will separate themselves from one another for no other reason than, “we just don’t get along anymore.” Their commitment to one another was based on nothing more than personal delight, and once that delight is gone, so is their commitment.

In addition to being unhealthy for our society, this sort of transient devotion flies in the face of Jesus’s teaching. Our love, our commitment, our devotion was never meant to be dependent on the personal attributes of those we associate with. We were supposed to be able to love and be committed to the wellbeing of everyone, even our enemies.

Just how exactly can we foster this sort of unconditional love and devotion within us? I delve into my answer in my next post.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 24:3

3 And Moses came and told the people all the words of the Lord, and all the judgments: and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which the Lord hath said will we do.

Back in Chapter 19 the Israelites had been informed that God wanted to make a special covenant with them, wherein they would be required to follow His commandments and He in turn would make them His peculiar, chosen people. In response, “all the people answered together, and said, All that the Lord hath spoken we will do.”

This preliminary agreement having been reached, Moses then went up into the mountain, and throughout the previous three chapters we have heard the law that they Lord laid down for the people. Now we reach the other bookend to this event, where Moses delivers the law to the Israelites, and once again, “and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which the Lord hath said will we do.”

Thus, first the Israelites agreed to receive God’s law, then they agreed to obey it. And as we will see in the following chapters, Israel’s acceptance of the law here is preliminary to them receiving further instructions, wherein God will give the command for them to build a tabernacle which He will fill with His presence.

We clearly see in this that we come into alignment with the Lord by degrees. First we open ourselves just to hearing His word, then we commit ourselves to actually following it, then we receive the gift of His spirit in our home. He does not ask us to commit to things unknowingly, but instead invites us to hear exactly what we’re committing to, and then we decide whether to move forward or not. He does not invade us with His presence right off, He offers it and we must accept it. What we know of the Lord, and how deep our connection goes with Him, is limited only by our willingness to accept each new commitment He offers us.

Posted on by Abe Austin

The Limit to God in Our Lives

What we know of the Lord, and how deep our connection goes with Him, is limited only by our willingness to accept each new commitment He offers us.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 19:20-25

20 And the Lord came down upon mount Sinai, on the top of the mount: and the Lord called Moses up to the atop of the mount; and Moses went up.

21 And the Lord said unto Moses, Go down, charge the people, lest they break through unto the Lord to gaze, and many of them perish.

22 And let the priests also, which come near to the Lord, sanctify themselves, lest the Lord break forth upon them.

23 And Moses said unto the Lord, The people cannot come up to mount Sinai: for thou chargedst us, saying, Set bounds about the mount, and sanctify it.

24 And the Lord said unto him, Away, get thee down, and thou shalt come up, thou, and Aaron with thee: but let not the priests and the people break through to come up unto the Lord, lest he break forth upon them.

25 So Moses went down unto the people, and spake unto them.

This is a very unusual set of verses. Moses had already ascended into the mountain, but the Lord told him to go back down and tell the people not to come up or they would perish. Moses replied that he had already told the people not to come up, as God had already communicated that requirement in the first place. God insisted, though, “Away, get thee down,” and so Moses went down to repeat the instructions to the people.

What was the point of this back-and-forth? Was God not aware that Moses has already given those instructions to the Israelites? Was there going to be a breach of protocol in spite of the original instructions, and God knew it, but Moses wasn’t expecting it? Was God simply making a point through repetition? Why weren’t Moses and God already on the same page on this matter?

Quite frankly, we aren’t given a clear explanation. In the record that we have, God never makes clear why this repeated instruction was deemed necessary. One thing that might be worth considering, though, is that the next time Moses was called up into the mountain we are not told that he went back down to remind the Israelites of their commitments, and that is the time that they actively defy the Lord and construct the golden calf.

So perhaps the Lord sent Moses down to interrupt them before they could go astray this time, but after they had received His law and more fully committed themselves, He would not stop them if they kept tending towards future infractions. Having made their bed, He would allow them to lie in it.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 19:7-9

7 And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before their faces all these words which the Lord commanded him.

8 And all the people answered together, and said, All that the Lord hath spoken we will do. And Moses returned the words of the people unto the Lord.

9 And the Lord said unto Moses, Lo, I come unto thee in a thick cloud, that the people may hear when I speak with thee, and believe thee for ever. And Moses told the words of the people unto the Lord.

The Lord had revealed to Moses His desire to make covenant and promise to the Israelites, but before doing so the Israelites needed to answer His offer. So Moses came down to the people, carrying with him the Lord’s words written down, and laid it before them to see what they would do with it.

Obviously, the Israelites had had their times of faithlessness and contention, but at this point they boldly declared their commitment. They were absolute in it as well, “all that the Lord hath spoken we will do.” Moses brought the words back to the Lord, and God revealed a very special plan. Not only would He give His covenant to the people, He would allow them to hear His voice directly in their own ears. Moses would still stand as a representative between the two, but the people would be able to listen in, receiving a personal testimony of the mind, will, and promise of the Lord.

Now, to be clear, the record is a little ambiguous as to whether they heard the entire set of laws that God spoke to Moses, or whether they only heard God calling out to Moses at the beginning and the rest of the transmission was related to them afterwards. In either case, the hearing of God’s word can be seen as something like a signature seal upon the law that He would give to them, assuring the people that it really came from Him and no other.

And this, of course, is something that has to be reenacted with each of us in our personal lives. We may have been told the good news by others, but God’s great desire is to speak His confirmation of it personally into our own ears. This example of the Israelites tells us the recipe that we can follow to have that same blessed result. After we have sought Him, and declared our commitment to do all that He has spoken, and purified ourselves, we can receive His word confirming His Law. Then we will know that the law is not just a law, but The Law, and that its author is God, not man.