Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 23:17-19

17 Three times in the year all thy males shall appear before the Lord God.

18 Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread; neither shall the fat of my sacrifice remain until the morning.

19 The first of the firstfruits of thy land thou shalt bring into the house of the Lord thy God. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother’s milk.

We are told that all the males must present themselves before the Lord at the tabernacle three times in the year. Given that we just heard about three feasts to be observed in a year, it may very well be that this mass gathering would coincide with those celebrations.

This would certainly make Israel a well measured nation. On a regular basis they would have a sort of informal census, seeing exactly what their maximum military strength and workforce was. This would also require the people to remain a close-knit society. Being required to regularly travel to one central location would mean that they could not spread themselves too far from their center, and on a regular basis they would see one another in close company. Separation, distinction, and rivalry would therefore all be deterred.

Also, it would seem, they were not to come to this great gathering empty-handed. The assumption is that these following verses about appropriate sacrifice are referencing these three gatherings in the year, and that every man would come to the Lord with something to offer. They would bring offerings of firstfruits or offerings of livestock, perhaps according to which feast was being observed or according to the man’s occupation.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 22:29-31

29 Thou shalt not delay to offer the first of thy ripe fruits, and of thy liquors: the firstborn of thy sons shalt thou give unto me.

30 Likewise shalt thou do with thine oxen, and with thy sheep: seven days it shall be with his dam; on the eighth day thou shalt give it me.

31 And ye shall be holy men unto me: neither shall ye eat any flesh that is torn of beasts in the field; ye shall cast it to the dogs.

In these laws the people are reminded of their obligation to offer their firsts to the Lord. The first of their fruit, of their liquor, of their oxen and sheep. Even offering the firstborn of their sons as priests.

The general understanding among scholars as to why verse 30 says the firstborn cattle would remain with their mothers for a week is so that they could give their mothers relief by drawing the milk from the udder. It would also allow them to be stable, strong, and clean before being brought to the Lord.

Verse 31 is a quick aside that tells the people that they must not eat carrion. Late on we will hear more on the dietary restrictions of the Mosaic law, but the carcass of even a clean animal would not be fit for human consumption, only for the feeding of one’s dogs. This is, of course, a very practical law, one that would safeguard the Israelites from consuming spoiled or infected meat.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 13:11-13

11 And it shall be when the Lord shall bring thee into the land of the Canaanites, as he sware unto thee and to thy fathers, and shall give it thee,

12 That thou shalt set apart unto the Lord all that openeth the matrix, and every firstling that cometh of a beast which thou hast; the males shall be the Lord’s.

13 And every firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb; and if thou wilt not redeem it, then thou shalt break his neck: and all the firstborn of man among thy children shalt thou redeem.

Obviously Israel departing Egypt and marching to Canaan was a fulfillment the promise God made to Abraham. But as verse 11 points out, it was not only a promise to Abraham. Moses told the Israelites “the Lord shall bring thee into the land of the Canaanites, as he sware UNTO THEE and to thy fathers. God had promised the land of Canaan anew to all of the people of Israel that lived in that day. In fact, if anything, the promise was more to them than to Abraham, as Abraham would only receive it through them.

And in return for God giving this gift to His people, the people were again reminded of how they must consecrate their firstborn to the Lord. “All that openeth the matrix” means the first child that breaches the walls of its mother’s womb. Though again, it was specifically to be the firstborn male. It is unclear to me if the firstborn was a female, whether the first male born thereafter would still be taken and consecrated to the Lord, or if there would be no consecration from that family unit, since the first male would not have “opened the matrix.”

Also, note that it was only clean beasts that were meant to be given as an offering, which is why the firstling donkeys were not eligible. A clean lamb could be given in its place, presumably a lamb that was not already owed to the Lord by being a firstborn, or if the person refused to give a lamb or had none to give, the donkey would be put to death, as then no one would have a claim on it.

Posted on by Abe Austin · 2 Comments

Scriptural Analysis- Genesis 4:3-5

3 And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord.

4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his coffering:

5 But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.

This account doesn’t give an explanation for why God respected Abel’s offering but not Cain’s. Several theories have been made, each seeming credible in their own way, but there is no telling which—if any—of them are the actual real reason why. And I don’t think it really matters.

As I have mentioned before, what is useful to me is how this story resonates with similar experiences of my own life. I ask myself what it teaches about me, more than what it teaches about Cain. And this account reminds me of how I used to make sacrifices of time and energy to try and offset all the wrong things I was doing in my addictions. I was fundamentally warped inside, harming myself and those around me, but devoting hours of service to my church in the hope that I could tip the scales in my favor.

And you know what? It never worked. Just like in Cain’s story, I felt like God had no respect for my offerings. All of that effort and it just wasn’t going anywhere, I was running in place without ever moving forward. And like Cain I felt angry about it. It seemed cruel to me that God just wouldn’t care about what I did. I was trying so hard, why wasn’t He seeing that and fixing me?!

In hindsight, though, it would have been immensely cruel for God to have supported me in that moment. If He had done so, it would have affirmed all my broken philosophies. It would have led me to believe that I really could offset all my sins if I just did enough other works that were good. There would have been no grace in my life, no inviting God to come into my heart as it was now to heal it, no coming to see Him as He really is.

So yes, I have been Cain, rejected and angry, but I know now that when God rejects an offering it is meant only as a kindness to His child.

Posted on by Abe Austin

The Nature of Sacrifice- Galatians 2:20, Matthew 10:38-39

I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.
He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.

COMMENTARY

I am crucified with Christ, but Christ liveth in me
I have already discussed how the nature of our sacrifice is to reform us to be in the image of Christ. This passage from Paul further stresses that Christ is also our exemplar in that sacrifice. Yes, he performed his atonement to cleanse our sins, but he also did it to demonstrate for us what we must do.
There is a beautiful intersection here of Christ’s sacrifice and our own. We sacrifice to become like him, and he sacrifices so that that is even possible. Were it not for his atonement, then it wouldn’t matter what we tried to sacrifice, we wouldn’t be able to experience the necessary change of heart. We might take a leap of faith, but there would be nothing to catch us on the other side.
This signifies that there is an order to sacrifice. Christ’s is the first, the prerequisite that allows us to make our own. Strange as it might sound, the freedom that Christ wins for us is the freedom to sacrifice; the freedom to not have to hold onto the old.

And he that taketh not his cross is not worthy of me
He that loseth his life for my sake shall find it
And now consider Christ’s famous pronouncement that only those who are willing to lose their life shall find it. He is not telling us that if we give up our old life then we’ll get it back again later. That wouldn’t be a sacrifice, after all, that would be a loan. No, what we give up will truly be given up, and the life that he promises we will find is not our old one back again. The life that we find will be an entirely new one: his life. We are to bear our cross, be “crucified with Christ,” and trust that as we do this new life will emerge.

Posted on by Abe Austin

The Nature of Sacrifice- 1 Corinthians 5:7, 1 Peter 2:5

Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:

Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

COMMENTARY

Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump
To offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ
Continuing the point from before, this new verse also speaks of how we are meant to change our old nature to align with Christ. And this change necessarily requires some sort of sacrifice. Quite simply we cannot put on a new piece of our Savior, until we have first made space for it by getting rid of something else. Thus, sacrifice.
This is why animal sacrifice was never sufficient to save souls, for it did not require any actual change. Those that came to the temple to only give up an animal missed the whole point of it. That offering was always meant to be coupled with one of these “spiritual sacrifices” that Peter mentions.

Even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us
When we see the sacrament prepared on the altar, we are witnessing what God is willing to offer to save us: the life of His son. But if we eat and drink, say “thank you,” and leave, then we, too, are missing the entire point. Because God’s offering was always meant to be matched with another…the “spiritual sacrifice” that we bring in return. The ancient Israelites never came to the altar empty handed, and neither should we.
Of course what we offer will not be on the same order of magnitude as what God has. That’s alright, it doesn’t have to be equal. But we should be offering something. Perhaps we could be giving up an old sin? Perhaps we could be making a new commitment for good? Just so long as it is something which states “I see what you have given up for me, God, and I will honor it by giving up my own inferior part, and taking the better one that you offer to replace it.”