“And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Take [1] Aaron, and [2] his sons, [3] the garments, and [4] the anointing oil, and [5] a bullock for the Sin-Offering, and [6] two rams, and [7] a basket of unleavened bread.” (Lev. 8:1,2)

Those who aspire to become members of the antitypical priesthood of God, ought carefully and prayerfully to study this picture and its seven parts, to see if their own consecration is therein set forth. Seven is itself a symbol of perfection and completeness, as if God were here showing forth the perfection and completeness of the consecration of those “called”—and that those “called” are just as much a part of the consecration ritual as those elements wherewith and whereby they are sanctified.

It should be noted that Moses in this ritual typifies and represents God, our heavenly Father. As Moses consecrated the typical priesthood, so God, himself, during this Gospel age has been setting apart—consecrating his antitypical priesthood, Christ Jesus (the High Priest), and the Church (the underpriesthood). Neither Aaron, nor his sons, could have consecrated themselves, save perhaps in the sense of responding to the call of Moses. The same is true of the antitypical priesthood; for does not the Apostle Paul declare: “And no man taketh this honor unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.” (Heb. 5:4)

“Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then … ye [Israel] shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation.” (Exod. 19:5,6)

“Because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God.” (Hos. 4:6)

“But you [the saints] are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s own people, that you may declare the wonderful deeds of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.” (1 Pet. 2:9, RSV)

Unless but a few representatives of the twelve tribes of Israel are meant, it stands to reason that gathering “all the congregation together unto the door of the Tabernacle” (Lev. 8:3) would have been a physical impossibility. We are inclined to think that this phrase means as much of the congregation of Israel as possible, and who literally stood in front of the door of the Court—the gate—and from which could perceive what was taking place within the Court, by the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation!

In a sense, and by accommodation, we may consider those of the world of mankind (the eventual Israel—the world) who during this Gospel age are privileged to “witness” (observe) the consecration of the antitypical priesthood, as being the counterpart of that congregation which gathered “unto the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation,” to witness the consecration of the typical priesthood.

“The world has seen the Priest—Head and body—suffer as a sin-offering during this age; Jesus was manifested to the Jews in the flesh (as a sin- offering), and as Paul could say, so can all followers in his footsteps say, ‘Christ is manifest in our mortal flesh.’ (2 Cor. 4:11) As the whole Christ has thus been manifest and has suffered in the flesh, so they shall also be ‘glorified together before the world.’ ” (T84)

Part 1—Aaron

This call unto the priesthood is to meet a predetermined purpose of God. In the type, this predetermination is evidenced in the fact that God called for the erection and setting apart of the Tabernacle in advance of the calling of Aaron and his sons. However, we may be reasonably sure that God had also predetermined the identity of his High Priest. In this connection let it be observed that only Aaron is called by name. Nadab, Abihu, Ithamar and Eleazer, though likewise called unto consecration, are referred to only in the collective expression—“his sons.” (Rom. 8:29) How significant!

“A father is represented in his son in a particular sense. The type of the High Priest in his office would thus be maintained through successive generations. The sons were not, as sons, typical, but sons were in type the best representation of the body of the priest that could be made, and hence were representative of us, who are the body of Christ.” (R4619:5)

In referring to God’s plan of the ages, the apostle says that it was purposed “in Christ Jesus,” our Lord. Who then would be so bold as to say that Jesus was not called to meet the predetermined purpose of God? (Eph. 3:11) In response to the “call” we find him at the age of 30 coming to John to be baptized—not, however, for the remission of sins, for he had none, but to symbolize, as it were, his consecration to do the Father’s will. In spirit we hear him say, “Lo, I come … to do thy will.” (Heb. 10:9; Psa. 40:7,8; Rev. 13:8)

“Nowhere in the Scriptures is the statement made that Christ came to sacrifice himself. What the Scriptures say is that he came to do the Father’s will. He did not refuse to drink the ‘cup’ which the Father poured for him, but drank it to the dregs. And for his obedience to this will, even unto death, no matter how long or how short a time the Father should be pleased to have that life continue—he received the reward. He gave over all into the Father’s hands. This was a sacrifice; for he had a right to use his life. But his obedience to his Father’s will led to the sacrifice for which he obtained the reward.” (R5087:4)

“The same sacrifices which proved the loyalty of the typical high priest and the underpriests became also sacrifices of atonement for the sins of the people—typical of the real sacrifices which are the basis for the forgiveness of the sins of the world and thus for the reconciliation of the world, in God’s due time. These are the ‘better sacrifices’ mentioned by St. Paul. (Heb. 9:23)” (R5299:4)

Thus did Jesus become an High Priest: for it was then and there that God anointed him with the holy Spirit (see Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:10), with the “oil of gladness above his fellows.” This consecration of himself on the part of Jesus, implied his entry into a covenant of sacrifice with Jehovah God. Not only did he then and there become our High Priest, but also the first (for he must have the preeminence in all things—Col. 1:18) of a new order of saints (Psa. 50:5).

“But whereas the sons of Aaron were not clothed until first Aaron had been clothed and anointed, it is signified that the robing and anointing of Christ’s people follows and depends upon the previous robing and anointing of their Head.” (The Expositor’s Bible, “Leviticus,” p. 216)

The sacrifice, which called for the setting aside of his own will—perfect though this was—and the acceptance in its stead of the heavenly Father’s, was but that same self-denial which he declared was the prime requisite of discipleship. He said: “If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.” (Luke 9:23) The cross, as is obvious, would be that which God’s will would lay upon him.

“To our understanding the picture of the ‘priest’ is an individual picture. It is not the work which priests are in a collective sense to do, but here the one priest is to do the work. In other words, the underpriests are merely recognized as representatives of the priest, the same as we are representatives of Christ. In that sense of the word it might be said that there is only one priest, the officiating priest, the one who does the particular work; but in another sense there is an underpriesthood—in the sense that we have a separate personality, as individuals, yet acting in conjunction with the Lord as his members.” (R4619:6)

“The priestly class … like the High Priest, are especially devoted to God and his service … ‘present their bodies living sacrifices, holy and acceptable to God, their reasonable service.’ (Rom. 12:1) In the type these were pictured both by Aaron’s sons and by the body of Aaron, he being the head. Thus the Apostle speaks of Christ as being the Head of the church, which is his body, we being ‘members in particular of the body of Christ’—1 Cor. 12:27.” (R5873:4)

But there is much more to this matter than mere self-denial and cross-bearing; there must also be a true love of righteousness, and an honest hatred of iniquity. It is possible to consecrate, and that because we love righteousness, but we may not sufficiently hate iniquity. Let it be noted that the oil of gladness belongs only to those who do both equally—love righteousness and hate iniquity. See how definitely this is stated in the apostle’s declaration concerning Jesus: “Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.” (Psa. 45:7; Heb. 1:9)

Jesus’ “call” and his response, and his consequent anointing are clearly set forth in the type. Aaron came in response to the call of Moses and presented himself in consecration, and in due course received the anointing over, i.e. above, his fellow priests. However, in order to fitly represent Jesus who was “holy, harmless, undefiled and separate from sinners,” Aaron had to be washed. This was done by Moses (Lev. 8:6). Jesus came from the hands of the Father, pure and holy, as did Aaron in the type, figuratively, by way of this washing. Then, and only then, could Aaron be clothed and anointed a high priest of God. Concerning Jesus, the testimony of the Scriptures is: “For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners.” (Heb. 7:26)

“The Apostle proceeds to show that both the Aaronic Priesthood and the Melchizedek Priesthood are of Divine Appointment. He points out that Aaron was called of God to be the head of the Aaronic Priesthood, and likewise Christ was also called of the Father to become the High Priest of the Melchizedek Order. ‘No man taketh this honor to himself but he that is called of God, even as was Aaron.’ So also Christ glorified not himself to be made a High Priest; but his High Priesthood came from God, who said unto Him, ‘Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten (born) Thee;’ and again, ‘Thou art a Priest forever, after the Order of Melchizedek.’ As the Head of this Melchizedek Order came through Divine invitation, so also the members of the Royal Priesthood must be called of God. Hence the Apostle sought to find and to influence, not the whole world of mankind, but ‘as many as the Lord your God shall call’ to this Melchizedek Priesthood.— (Acts 2:39).” (SM140)

“The Apostle reasons (Heb. 5:1) that all the Jewish priests were taken from amongst their fellows and especially ordained, or set apart, for their work, to represent their people before God, offering for them both their gifts and their sacrifices for sins. In this arrangement the priests were able to sympathize with the people, because they were subject to the same weaknesses, and also had need of the forgiveness of their own sins. But even amongst these imperfect, blemished, sinful priests, who needed to make offerings for their own sins, none was allowed to take this office of himself. God must call him to the office. Thus it was with Aaron. God called him to be the head priest.

“So, the Apostle points out, it must be with the antitypical priests on a higher plane. Christ, the High Priest spiritual, and his elect church, the royal priesthood on the spirit plane, must also be called of God. They could not assume the office otherwise. ‘Christ did not glorify himself to make him- self a High Priest.’ God honored him in this way, however, saying to him in the prophecy of the Psalms, ‘Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee’; and again, ‘thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.’— (Psa. 2:7; 110:4).” (R5472:2)

“Although Messiah had long existed as the archangel, nevertheless the Prophet David, speaking for God, said concerning him: ‘Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten (literally borne or delivered) thee.’ The Apostle would have his hearers note that this birth mentioned referred to our Lord’s resurrection, as it is written, he was the ‘first born from the dead among many brethren.’ If the Messiah was to be thus born from the dead, it implies that he must first die, and hence the Apostle gives this as a prophetic prediction fulfilled in our Lord’s experiences.” (R2149:6)

“A priest, in the only true sense, is a mediator between God and fallen creatures, the object of such mediation being to restore and establish harmony on a legal basis. The office of the priest or mediator between God and man is to restore to perfection and consequent harmony with God a race of human beings condemned to death or already dead or dying. Hence the priest of necessity must be ‘mighty to save.’ (Psa. 89:19) He must have both the right and the power to recall the dead to life, and the ability to instruct and discipline, and thus to lead every willing subject back to the perfect estate from which Adam and the race fell. To secure this right he must first satisfy the demands of justice, which required the extinction of the human race; and these demands of justice could only be met by a corresponding sacrifice—a human life for a human life. The life of Adam and all in him could only be redeemed by another perfect human being. And so it was—‘Since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection from the dead.’ (1 Cor. 15:21) By the sacrifice of a perfect human existence is secured the right of the priest to restore.

“But beyond the right or privilege of restoring, the priest must have the power, and power would of necessity presuppose his own everlasting existence. He must have power to create, since to restore to being that which had completely lost existence is to re-create it, and is a greater work even than the first creation; he must also have perfect knowledge, both of God’s requirements and of human necessities, as well as perfect ability to guide a race so destitute back to the glorious heights of perfection and blessed harmony and communion with God.

“What an office! Who would presume to assume such a title? It belongs really and only to Jehovah’s Anointed. Even Jesus, ‘the Anointed One, did not glorify himself to become a high priest,’ but he has ‘been declared by God a high priest according to the order of Melchisedec.’ (Heb. 5:4,5,10—Diaglott) Jehovah honored him by inviting him to that position, and giving him all power to fill it. In harmony with God’s plan, not only has Jesus, his Anointed one, been chosen as the chief, or high priest, but the ‘little flock,’ who follow him in sacrifice now, are called to be joint-heirs with him in the same honor. ‘If we suffer with him we shall also be glorified together.’ Jesus alone is the great High Priest; but the Gospel church, redeemed by his death and associated with him in divine power hereafter, is counted in with him, and, together with him, will constitute the great Prophet, Priest and King promised, to liberate and bless the groaning creation—the seed of promise.—(Gen. 22:18; 28:14; Gal. 3:29; Acts 3:20-23; Psa. 110:4).” (R3951:2)

Part 2—Aaron’s sons

The washing of Aaron’s sons also signifies the coming forth from the hands of God of a class of underpriests, purified and cleansed. Unlike Jesus, these were not originally clean, having been born in sin, and “shapen in iniquity.” (Psa. 51:5) There was none righteous, no, not one! (Psa. 14:3; Rom. 3:10) These then were justified, made right in the sight of God, not through, or by any deeds of their own, but by God himself, and this through an inspired faith! (See Eph. 2:8-10) These too, were called to meet the predetermined purpose of God which is in Christ Jesus, and were accordingly foreknown of him (see Rom. 8:29,30). Yet, even as the sons of Aaron owed to Aaron their existence, and therefore also their eventual call to the priesthood, so these antitypical priests owe both their existence and their calling to God, to Christ Jesus. There would have been no call for Nadab, Abihu, Ithamar and Eleazer, had it not been for the fact of their blood-relationship to Aaron; nor could there have been any call to you or me aside from the blood of Jesus which makes our response both possible and acceptable. Thus there is with us too, a blood-relationship unto Christ; and for this, we must praise God, since it is he “who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath transplanted us into the kingdom of his dear son, in whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins.” (Col. 1:12-14) This too, is what is implied in the apostle’s words:

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: according as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame be- fore him in love, having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.” (Eph. 1:3-6)

“The ministry of reconciliation or atonement is participated in by the entire ‘Royal Priesthood’ of which our Lord Jesus is the Chief Priest or High Priest. All the Priests share in the ‘better sacrifices’ which have progressed throughout this Gospel age, and which will be finished with its close (Rom. 12:1); and all who thus share the sufferings of Christ shall likewise share his future glory as participators with him in the great and glorious ministry of reconciliation of the Millennial Kingdom.

“As for these underpriests, they ‘were by nature children of wrath, even as others,’ and needed first to be reconciled or atoned to God before they could be called of God to this priesthood;—‘for no man taketh this honor to him- self, but (only) he that is called of God.’ It is not until after we have received the atonement, at the hands of our Redeemer, the High Priest, that we are privileged to be reckoned as joint-sacrificers, joint-mediators, joint-reconcilers, joint-at-one-ers.” (F487)

Part 3—Garments

Undoubtedly it has been observed that neither Aaron nor his sons brought the garments with which they were to be clothed. Moses brought these all.

For Aaron there were (1) the breastplate, (2) the ephod, (3) the robe, (4) the coat,1 (5) the miter and its golden crown, (6) the linen girdle, (7) the curious girdle, (8) the breeches (Exod. 28:4-39,42; 39:2-31). Of these, seemingly four constituted his “sacrificial” garments; they were (1) the breeches, (2) the coat, (3) the linen girdle, (4) the miter and its golden crown. (Lev. 16:4)

For the underpriests there were but the linen garments including instead of the miter and crown which the High Priest wore, linen bonnets. (Exod. 28:40,42) It should be remembered that God himself declared all these garments, both the “glorious” and the “sacrificial,” to be “for glory and for beauty.” (Exod. 28:2,40) Again, we say, How significant! It matters not whether as now we are garbed in the linen garments of sacrifice, or as in the future in the garments of glory. Our robings all are for glory and for beauty.

Of course, for Jesus, the linen garments of sacrifice represented his own actual righteousness and purity. For us, the underpriesthood, however, the white linen garments of sacrifice represent Jesus’ righteousness and purity imputed to us—for our glory and for our beauty! But when we get into the glory of the Kingdom, and are made members of that grand and glorious High Priest which is to bless all mankind, the white linen coat will then represent our own righteousness and purity. (Rev. 19:8; compare T36 with T29; R4602:2)

“When Jesus made his consecration, he was begotten of the spirit. He was born of the spirit, completed of the spirit, in his resurrection, and he was the first born to this condition. Afterward, those Jews who were in the right condition of heart were accepted on the same terms. But instead of God’s making those called to be of the spiritual seed actually just, perfect—as our Lord Jesus was—he justifies them by faith. Jesus was absolutely without imperfection—the Apostle Paul speaks of him as being ‘holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners.’ (Heb. 7:26) God imputes to the followers of Jesus a sufficiency of his merit that they may be reckoned just—counted as perfect.” (R5836:6)

¹ Lev. 8:7 seems to suggest that the (linen) coat was a part of the special garments of “glory and beauty.” Yet it is difficult to reconcile this with the fact that the linen garments of sacrifice included the coat and the linen girdle (Lev. 16:4) which had to be taken off before putting on the other garments (the garments for glory and beauty) at the end of the Atonement Day (Lev. 16:23,24). However, on reading Lev. 8:7 a bit more carefully and critically, it seems that both the linen garments and those for glory and beauty were worn by Aaron on the occasion of the initial consecration of the priesthood. It reads: “And he put upon him the [linen] coat, and girded him with the [linen] girdle, and clothed him with the robe, and put the ephod upon him, and he girded him with the curious girdle of the ephod.”

“Justification is symbolically represented as a robe of righteousness, of pure linen, clean and white, by which the Lord covers the blemishes and imperfections of all whom he accepts through faith in his precious blood. All endeavors toward righteousness on our part, aside from the merit of Christ are likewise symbolically represented as ‘filthy rags’ of our own righteousness. (Isa. 64:6) True, certain Scriptures refer to our efforts towards righteousness, by obedience to the divine commands, as a cleansing work, progressing throughout our entire Christian course, as the Apostle expresses it, ‘Having our bodies washed with pure water,’ and cleansing of the Church by the ‘washing of water by the Word:’ (Eph. 5:26; Titus 3:5) and these are very proper presentations of the cleansing of our hearts, the ‘putting away the filth of the flesh:’ (2 Cor. 7:1) and these Scriptures are very properly understood to refer to a daily and a life work. But all these cleansings of thoughts, words and acts,—all these endeavors to bring our mortal bodies into closer conformity to the will of God in Christ, are based upon our previous acceptance of Christ and our justification through faith in his blood. The Scriptural thought is that from the time we consecrate ourselves to God, all our imperfections are covered from the Lord’s sight through the merit of the ransom-sacrifice, provided by Jehovah’s grace, and laid hold of and appropriated by faith. Since only that which is perfect could be acceptable of God, and since we, with all our efforts and washings, would still be imperfect, it is manifest that our acceptance with the Father is under the covering of the robe of Christ’s righteousness, his perfection reckoned or applied or imputed to us. Thus we are first ‘accepted in the beloved’ (Eph. 1:6); and then daily manifest our devotion to righteousness and our desire to please the Lord by efforts toward holiness.” (E445)

In the type Aaron was arrayed in the “glorious garments” before he had offered a single sacrifice either for himself or for the people. What may this mean? We believe that God intended here to show forth that Aaron at this time received these garments merely as the earnest of his inheritance. Really, these “glorious garments” as yet, were Aaron’s only by possession, though not by ownership! Not until at the end of the Day of Atonement, after having offered himself for the people, did these garments become his as a matter of ownership (Lev. 16:23,24). So too, at the time of our begettal we receive the earnest of our inheritance, but the full inheritance awaits us only after we have faithfully carried out our covenant of sacrifice, even unto death. (Eph. 1:13,14) On this point we quote from the pen of Bro. Russell:

“This faithfulness, this daily dying, is requisite to our making our calling and election sure; and it is to such as faithfully walk in the footsteps of the Lord that he promises the glory, honor and immortality reserved for the faithful overcomers who shall constitute the ‘Very Elect’ members of the New Creation. Our Lord’s words are, ‘Be thou faithful unto death and I will give thee a crown of life,’ (Rev. 2:10). We see, then, that it is with the Church as it was with her Lord and Head—that the consecration brings the first-fruits of the Spirit, faithfulness daily continues the blessing of the Spirit, with increasing joys and fruits, while the faithful finishing of the covenant in actual death is essential to the receiving of the full inheritance—a share in the First Resurrection and its glories and honors.—Eph. 1:12-14; Rom. 8:16,17” (F444)

“From the very start God permits us to count the ‘treasure’ as ours. True, we do possess it, even though it be merely in an earthen vessel. Yet this possession is really only an ‘in part’ condition, which will in due time give way to that which is ‘perfect’—full ownership of the ‘treasure.’ This lesson is also brought to our attention by the posts which supported the first and second vails of the Tabernacle. Those behind the first vail—setting forth our present ‘in part’ condition,—were covered with gold, symbolic of the divine nature. Their being in sockets of copper represented how ‘we have this treasure (the divine nature) in earthen vessels.’ (2 Cor. 4:7) Those behind the second vail, representing divine nature, but no longer in sockets of copper … they were in sockets of silver (reality, truth, verity).” (T114,115)

Thus, as we look upon Aaron at the time of his consecration, robed in the earnest of his inheritance—the garments of glory and beauty—we see him as he will again appear at the end of the Day of Atonement, in full possession of the inheritance, coming forth to bless the people. Says Bro. Russell:

“We thus see that Aaron, robed and anointed, represented the entire Christ—the complete Seed of Abraham, in which God is about to bless all the families of the earth. But let us not forget that we have been viewing the Great Deliverer from God’s standpoint, and with him looking down to the time of his manifestation—the dawn of the Millennial Day—when all the members shall have come into the Body, and when the ‘holy oil’ shall have run down ‘to the skirts of his garments,’ anointing every member. (Lev. 10:7) Then he will begin the work of blessing mankind.” (T36 and T38)

“The anointing of the High Priest was still a different matter, and represented the oneness, the solidarity, of the elect Church; for this anointing came only upon the one who was to officiate as chief priest—upon Aaron only at first; but upon each of his sons as they succeeded to the office of chief priest ‘to minister unto me in the priest’s office.’ (Exod. 28:41; 40:13,15) Christ Jesus our Lord, as the Head of the Church which is his body, ‘was anointed with the oil of gladness (the holy Spirit) above (head over) his fellows’ or joint-heirs, the under members of the ‘Royal Priesthood.’ It was all poured upon him, and ‘of his fulness (abundance) have all we received, and favor upon favor.’ It was an ‘unspeakable gift’ that we were pardoned and justified through the merit of his sacrifice; yea, it is almost beyond belief that we should be called to be his joint-heirs in the Kingdom and have our consecration ‘sealed’ with the sprinkling of the blood and oil and come under the anointing of our Head.” (F131)

“This anointing that is on the church comes to us through Christ, flowing down from the head over all the body members, as shown in the type of the high priest of Israel, and as declared by the Psalmist (Psa. 133:2). The Apostle John says ‘the anointing which we have received of him abideth in us.’ Again, ‘hereby we know that we dwell in him (God) and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.’ The Apostle Peter declares that Jesus ‘having received of the Father the promise of the holy Spirit (for the church), hath shed forth this.’ (1 John 2:27; 4:13; Acts 2:33) It is from the Father and by the Son. This corroborates St. Paul’s statement that all things are of the Father, and all things are by the Son. (1 Cor. 8:6) The Scriptures tell us that we are begotten and anointed of God.” (R5536:5)

Part 4—Anointing Oil

“Under the law, the anointing was the ceremony by which the priests were installed in their service. They were anointed to their office with a peculiar ointment, called the ‘Holy Anointing Oil,’ used upon none but the priests, and unlawful for any one else to have or to make (Exod. 30:25-33,38) This oil typified the Holy Spirit of adoption whereby we, the real ‘royal priest-hood,’ are sealed as sons of God. Only the consecrated ones, the priests, are ever to be thus anointed.” (T28)

A careful examination of the type reveals that only Aaron received an out-pouring of the “holy anointing oil” upon his head. By this, however, not only was Aaron anointed into the priesthood, but his whole family as well. He was made a high priest over his family of underpriests. Since the underpriesthood was thus anointed in its head-chief, or high priest, there was no need for the individual anointing of each member. Yet it would seem needful to show that each of the sons was a partaker of the high priest’s anointing, and so we find that they each received of this “holy anointing oil” but only in a sprinkling, and then, not until the oil had been commingled with the blood of a sacrifice—the ram of consecration (Lev. 8:30). How beautifully this shows forth the fact that we, the antitypical priesthood of God, are anointed in our Lord and Head; that we are partakers of his anointing, through the merit of his precious blood.

“Under the Divine arrangement with the nation of Israel their High Priests, who represented the entire priesthood, were inducted into office by an anointing with a peculiar kind of rich perfume called the holy anointing oil. This oil was made according to a special prescription, and the people were not permitted to use, upon penalty of death. After Israel had become a kingdom, the kings were also anointed with this holy anointing oil.

“These two offices of priest and king were afterwards shown to be typical of a united service which would find its antitype in One who was to be a Priest upon His Throne—a Royal Priest, a Priestly King. The Scriptures give us a type of this united office in the person of Melchizedek, of whom it is written that he was a king of Salem and a priest of the Most High God. (Gen. 14:18- 20; Heb. 7:1-17) By thus comparing Scripture with Scripture we learn that Messiah, who is to accomplish the great work of blessing the world, is to be the One who will combine the offices of both king and priest.

“Reverting to the typical picture of the anointing of the Jewish High Priest at the time of his induction into office and comparing it with antitype, we perceive that the great antitypical Priest was anointed at Jordan. There our Lord Jesus, the Head of the Christ company, received the holy Spirit without measure. At Pentecost the antitypical anointing oil began to flow down to the Church. As in the type the oil poured upon the head of the high priest flowed down to the very skirts of his garment, so the holy Spirit has come down from the Head of the Church even to the last members of the anointed Body of Christ.—(Psa. 133:1-3).” (R5549:4)

“God gave his holy Spirit to our Lord in the fullest degree. Jesus himself tells us that God gave not his Spirit by measure unto him, because he was able to receive the holy Spirit in full measure. Those who are counted as his members are not able to receive the spirit in full measure, because of their imperfection. The less fallen man can receive more of the spirit, and the more fallen man can receive less.” (R5424:4)

“The holy Spirit was typified throughout the Jewish dispensation by the holy oil which, poured upon the head of the High Priest, ran down over all the body; so whoever is of the body of Christ is under the anointing, under the influence of the Spirit, and wherever the Spirit of the Lord is, it is unctuous, smooth, lubricative. Its tendency is to follow peace with all men, so far as is possible, and so far as fidelity to righteousness will permit. It is opposed to friction,—anger, malice, hatred, strife. Those under its influence are glad to be taught of the Lord, and so far from quarreling with his plan and revelation, they readily fall into full harmony with them, and have correspondingly the lubrication promised—the unction, the smoothness, the peace, the joy, the holiness of mind.” (F261)

“The anointing of the High Priest … represented the oneness, the solidarity, of the elect Church; for this anointing came only upon the one who was to officiate as chief priest—upon Aaron only at first; but upon each of his sons as they succeeded to the office of chief priest ‘to minister unto me in the priest’s office.’ (Exod. 28:41; 40:13,15.) Christ Jesus our Lord, as the Head of the Church which is his body, ‘was anointed with the oil of gladness (the holy Spirit) above (head over) his fellows’ or joint-heirs, the under members of the ‘Royal Priesthood.’ It was all poured upon him, and ‘of his fulness (abundance) have all we received, and favor upon favor.’ It was an ‘unspeakable gift’ that we were pardoned and justified through the merit of his sacrifice; yea, it is almost beyond belief that we should be called to be his joint- heirs in the Kingdom and have our consecration ‘sealed’ with the sprinkling of the blood and the oil and come under the anointing of our Head.” (F131)

There are two separate and distinct pictures to be recognized in the Leviticus 8 type. The first picture in which Aaron arrayed in his garments of “glory and beauty”—washed, clothed, and anointed—represents “the entire Christ”—the complete Seed of Abraham … from God’s viewpoint … when all the members shall have come into the Body, and when the “holy oil” shall have run down “to the skirts of his garments,” anointing every member. (Lev. 10:7) (T38)

“And he poured of the anointing oil upon Aaron’s head, and anointed him, to sanctify him.” (Lev. 8:12)

The second picture in which Aaron alone represents Christ Jesus, and the sons of Aaron, the underpriesthood, represent the Church. (T39).

“And Moses took of the anointing oil, and of the blood which was upon the altar, and sprinkled it upon Aaron, and upon his garments, and upon his sons, and upon his sons’ garments with him.” (Lev. 8:30)

“Looking at the matter from the standpoint of the Scriptures we shall see that they sometimes speak of Christ and the Church under the figure of one great Priest, Jesus the Head and the Church his Body, his consecrated self- sacrificing members … Sometimes the Scriptures speak of us as the under-priesthood, and Christ Jesus as representing the Head of this priesthood. In all these figures the thought is that in some sense we share with our Lord in His Work.” (R4616:6)

Both of these pictures set forth one basic and fundamental truth, viz., that only our Head, Jesus, received the direct anointing of the holy Spirit; and that we, the Church, become partakers of his anointing, and then only because we are in the Body, under the Head. This is clearly indicated in the type by the fact that only Aaron received the holy oil as an outpouring upon his head. The fact that the sons of Aaron received no such direct anointing, seems to imply that their anointing into the priesthood was in Aaron, and that figuratively they were represented in his body. So we, as a great brotherhood of body members (typified by the sons of Aaron who were all brothers) under our Head, Christ Jesus, have been anointed into the royal priesthood of God, having received of that identical anointing of the holy Spirit which came upon Jesus at Jordan. The psalmist of old, in speaking of the beautiful spirit which promotes the unity of this brother-hood of body members, likens it unto the holy anointing oil—“the precious ointment upon the head, that ran down upon the beard, even Aaron’s beard: that went down to the skirts of his garments.” (Psa. 133:2) And truly, our Lord and Head, was anointed with the oil of gladness above (and before) his fellows (fellow-members). (Heb. 1:9)

It is interesting to note that in the type the underpriests received none of the holy anointing oil until it was commingled with the blood of the ram of consecration, and then only as a sprinkling (Lev. 8:30). Here at least, in so far as the antitypical underpriesthood is concerned, the blood evidently represents our justification. (F131)

“The anointing oil mingled with the blood of consecration was sprinkled over them (Lev. 8:30), teaching that our consecration is accepted only because we are justified by the precious blood of our Redeemer; thus we are told that we are ‘accepted in the Beloved’ only.— (Eph. 1:6).” (T46)

“This sprinkling signified that now, through the atoning blood which had been accepted before God upon the altar, and through the sanctifying Spirit of grace, which was symbolized by the anointing, thus inseparably associated each with the other, they had been brought into covenant relationship with God regarding the office of the priesthood. That this their covenant relation to God concerned them, not merely as private persons, but in their official character, was intimated by the sprinkling, not only of their persons, but of the garments which were the insignia of their priestly office.” (The Expositor’s Bible, “Leviticus,” p. 210)

“As Aaron had the holy oil poured upon his head, so our Head, the Lord Jesus, was anointed with the anti-typical oil—the Holy Spirit—when he was thirty years of age, on the banks of the Jordan, at the time of his consecration. There he was ‘anointed with the oil of gladness above his fellows’ as head over all his joint-heirs. A measure of the spirit is given to every member who thus consecrates; but Jehovah gave ‘not the spirit by measure unto him.’ (John 3:34) John saw and bore record that our High Priest was thus anointed, and Peter adds his testimony, ‘How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the holy Spirit and with power.’ John 1:32; Luke 4:1; Acts 10:38.

“The anointing oil was poured only upon the head. The underpriests were not anointed individually. They were recognized as members of the High Priest’s body, and received their anointing only in him as their head. Hence, also the antitypical priests are merely partakers of the spirit of Christ, and only those who are in Christ Jesus are partakers of the anointing which seals all those who will be recognized as heirs of God’s promises, and joint- heirs with Jesus Christ their Lord.—Eph. 1:13,14; 4:30.

“The oil ‘ran down … to the skirts of his (the High Priest’s) garments’ (Psa. 133:2), thus representing how all the members of Christ’s body are to be partakers of the same anointing after their Head. ‘The anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you.’ (1 John 2:27) This oil began to reach the body on the day of Pentecost, and flowed on down through this Gospel age, anointing all who are truly baptized into Christ, constituting them, with their Head, kings and priests unto God, to reign a thousand years.— Rev. 20:6” (T37)

“Our coming into the body is our coming under the anointing. One is a member of the Anointed the instant he is begotten. In thinking of the begetting and the anointing, we are merely viewing the matter from two different angles. We of today were not anointed eighteen hundred years ago, although the anointing came at that time upon the church. The anointed office may be forfeited, without the spirit-begotten life being forfeited, as in the case of the great company. But the instant we are individually inducted into that body, that instant we come under the anointing … Our begetting is individual—our baptism, or anointing, is collective, but the one is as personal as the other.” (R5393:5)

“The anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you; but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.” (1 John 2:27)

“He who sets us, establishes us, and has anointed us of the holy Spirit, and thus made us members of this holy company, is God, the heavenly Father. It is not the province of even our Redeemer to set us and anoint us. As the Apostle says, ‘God hath set every member in the body as it hath pleased him.’ All things are of the Father, and all things are by the Son; hence this anointing that we receive comes from the Father. Nevertheless, the Channel is the Lord Jesus. This holy Spirit which the Father has given to Jesus, he has shed forth upon us. The Father authorizes it, the Son sheds it forth.” (R5498:3)

“The anointing oil or symbol of consecration was poured upon the head of the high priest only, but the underpriests were represented in the members of his body, even as Christ is the head over the church which is his body, and altogether constitute the royal priesthood. So the holy Spirit given without measure to our Lord and head applies to us (his body) through him. The Father gave the spirit to the Son only: all of the anointing oil was poured upon the head. At Pentecost it ran down from the head to the body, and has continued with the body ever since, and whoever comes into the ‘body’ comes thereby under the consecrating influence—the spirit of holiness, the spirit of God, the spirit of Christ, the spirit of the truth.—Acts 2:4.” (R3280:4)

“We receive this anointing from the Father through our Lord Jesus Christ. All things are of the Father and all things are by the Son. (1 Cor. 8:6) The Father bestowed the holy Spirit upon the Son, and authorized him to bestow it upon his body. This granting of the holy Spirit was designed to be an anointing for the whole body: for the Father recognized the body when he recognized the Head.” (R5549:2)

“The prophet David was guided by the Lord to give us a pen-picture of the Anointing, and how it was all poured upon our Head and must run down to us from him. (Psa. 133:1-3; 45:7; Luke 4:18) The members of the Church are the ‘brethren’ whose spirit impels them to ‘dwell together in unity.’ All who are one with the Head must be in sympathy with fellow-members of his body the Church.” (F132)

“It is like the precious ointment upon the head, that ran down upon the beard, even Aaron’s beard: that went down to the skirts of his garments (Psa. 133:2, KJV)

The Hebrew word rendered skirts is peh and according to Young’s Analytical Concordance means “mouth” and has been so rendered by the KJV 341 times. But it has also been rendered:

Surely, with a word as flexible as this one, we must understand it in the light of its context. To us, the terms hem and edge, having reference to the flowing skirts of Israel’s ancient High Priest, seem most appropriate, and fit in very well with the antitypical significance of Aaron’s anointing.

“This oil poured upon the head of Aaron himself (Exod. 29; Lev. 8). Its abundance, as well as its good quality (Isa. 39:2; Eccl. 7:1) are presented to the mind by the statement that it flowed down upon the beard, which according to Lev. 21:5, permitted its natural growth, allowed the oil to run down upon the garments, not merely to the upper edge, the opening for the head, but to the lower one.” (Lange, Commentary, “Psalm 133:2”)

Part 5—The Bullock

Now for the sin-offering. It was Moses, not Aaron nor his sons, who provided the bullock for this occasion—the consecration of the priesthood. The animal here used for a sin-offering was a bullock. Since the bullock represents perfect humanity, we may gather from the type, that neither the Logos (Jesus in his prehuman existence), nor the Church possessed it; but that God, here typified by Moses, supplied it for the specific purpose of sacrifice.

For Jesus he prepared a perfect body: “a body hast thou prepared me.” (Heb. 10:5) For the Church he did not prepare perfect bodies, but he did prepare the Church to be the “body” (Eph. 1:23) of Christ, through the imputation of the righteousness of her Head. This provision of God, and this alone, enables the Church to make up, as it were, “that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ for the body’s sake.” (Col. 1:24). Is it not significant that in the type both Aaron and his sons laid their hands upon the head of the bullock? (Lev. 8:14)

“The bullock for the sin-offering was brought, ‘and Aaron and his sons laid their hands upon the head’ of it, thus saying, This sacrifice represents us. From that moment, all that happened to the bullock represented what was to be done to Jesus and his body, the Church, as human beings. The bullock was delivered up to the ‘Law’ (represented by Moses), to meet its demands against Israel, typical of mankind in general. To meet the demands of the Law it had to be slain—‘and Moses slew it.’ ” (T41)

“The laying of the offerer’s hands on the head of the victim offered … act in itself was nothing more than the expression of the identity of the offerer and offering. In each case the giving up of the offering represented the surrender of the person of the offerer. The offering, whatever it might be, stood for, and was looked upon as identical with the offerer. In the one case, in the sweet savour offerings, it represented the offerer as an accepted worshipper, wholly surrendering himself upon the altar of the Lord, to be a sweet savour to Jehovah.” (Jukes, The Law of the Offerings, “The Burnt-Offering,” p. 38)

In the type, it will be observed, it was Moses who brought the bullock for both Aaron and his sons to lay their hands upon the head of it, as if to say, We accept this bullock from your hands, Moses, and in this ritual it is to represent us. Like all the animals in this ‘consecration’ ritual, the bullock was slain by Moses.

“As only those believers who make consecration to the utmost—‘even unto death’—are begotten of the holy Spirit and counted members of the Great High Priest, so the types illustrated; for the Levites in general did not receive of the holy anointing oil, typical of the holy Spirit, but only the sacrificers, the priests. These were all sprinkled with the oil mixed with blood, to show that the holy Spirit granted to the members of Christ is theirs only by virtue of the shedding of blood: (1) the sacrifice of Christ Jesus on their behalf, justifying them; and (2) their pledge to joint-sacrifice with Christ— laying down their lives in his service. (Exod. 29:21).” (F131)

Thus God supplies for the Church the human perfection of Christ Jesus, her Head; accounting to her the human perfection which would be hers in the end of the Millennial age, were each of her individual members merely sharing earthly restitution. The life-rights then possessed would not be those lost in Father Adam, but rather those laid down by the man Christ Jesus. Such an accounting, or imputation of the merit of Christ does not make the Church actually perfect, but in the matter of her consecration makes her acceptable “in the beloved.” (Eph. 1:6) Her true condition, as far as her humanity is concerned, is more particularly set forth in the goat of the sin-offering of the Atonement Day; or maybe in the burnt-offerings whereof the head, unwashed (representing Jesus) having been laid upon the altar, the legs and inwards (body members, representing the Church) were first washed ere they could be laid as pieces unto the head. (Lev. 8:20,21)

Let it be noted that nothing is ever said about washing either head or body of the bullock. Undoubtedly this is because the bullock represents perfect humanity, implying also a sinlessness requiring no justification. Here it is clearly set forth that if we are ‘in Christ’—one with him, we are already justified. That this justification took place before we became worthy of oneness with Christ, is shown in the type, we believe, by the washing which the priesthood underwent ere any of the animals were slain. It is implied in the reaching forth of their hands and placing them upon the ‘head’ of the bullock. Surely, our justification is based upon the fact that we have accepted the perfect humanity of Christ Jesus as our own. If we have appropriated to ourselves his righteousness, made available by way of his ransom sacrifice on our behalf, our own righteousness (unrighteousness) must have passed away, and if so, our standing before God is in Christ’s righteousness, and in his alone. Such indeed, is our justification.

The bullock represented perfect humanity—actual in the case of Jesus, reckoned (because it is imputed) in the case of the Church. Neither Jesus, in his prehuman existence as the Logos, nor the Church as members of the fallen race, had a perfect humanity to offer as a ‘living sacrifice’ holy and acceptable unto the LORD. Jehovah had to supply this: thus he prepared that perfect humanity—that of Jesus (Heb. 10:5), in which both Jesus and his Church would be acceptable in their consecration. For the Church no individually perfect bodies were provided: they all were accepted in him— ‘in the beloved’, i.e., in his perfection. So was the Church prepared as the body for that Christ of which Jesus was the head.

Its blood, representing the sacrificed life, was put upon the horns of the altar to purify it, and poured at the base of the altar (Lev. 8:15—beside the bottom of the altar, Exod. 29:12) to sanctify it. All the blood of the bullock was thus used—not any of it was left over.

The blood having been applied to the horns of the altar and poured at its base, seems to point out “that the altar of earthly sacrifices was acceptable to God by reason of the shed blood, (the life given), and that all who realize the power of the Altar, must first recognize the blood which sanctifies it” and that “even the earth was purchased back from the curse.” (T42) Horns are symbols of power, probably because those creatures bearing them of- ten manifest their power by means of them.

This consecration of the altar was in addition to that accomplished with the holy anointing oil at the time of God’s formal acceptance of the Tabernacle as his dwelling place. (Exod. 40:10) The altar, in this instance, does not specifically represent the ransom sacrifice as the basis upon which all other sacrifices should be acceptable, though this is of course implied. In this type it seems to represent more particularly the earthly altar, i.e. the earth itself is made acceptable as an altar, by way of the shed blood which in this age sanctifies it again—at the incoming age!

It should be noted that neither in Exodus 29 nor in Leviticus 8 is anything said about taking any of the blood of the sin-offering (the bullock) into the Sanctuary (Holy or Most Holy—see Exod. 29:12; Lev. 8:15) though the carcass was burned “without the camp.” (Exod. 29:14; Lev. 8:17) Nor does this militate against the Apostle Paul’s declaration in Heb. 13:11, for that clearly sets forth the fact that if the blood of the offering is brought into the Sanctuary for sin, then the carcass of the animal had to be burned “without the camp”!

The red heifer was burned “without the camp” (Num. 19:3,5) yet its blood was merely sprinkled in the direction of the Tabernacle of the Congregation—the Sanctuary. (Num. 19:4, Leeser; T105, 109)

“But the bullock, and his hide, his flesh, and his dung, he burnt with fire without the camp; as the LORD commanded Moses.” (Lev. 8:17)

“Thus the humanity of the Christ complete—Head and Body—is made ‘a sin-offering,’ suffering the destruction to which the world was doomed, and from which, by this sacrifice, it will ultimately be delivered—the merit being in the sacrifice of our Lord Jesus, we, his ‘brethren,’ being privileged to fill up a measure of his sufferings, as ‘members of his Body.’ (Col. 1:24) But while the humanity of the royal priesthood is destroyed, as a vile thing in the eyes of the world, as represented in the burning of the bullock without the ‘Camp,’ God accepts the heart devotion which prompts the sacrifice, which says, ‘Lo, I come to do thy will, O God.’ ‘I delight to do thy will, O my God.’ This was represented by the offering on the altar of the fat and parts of the inward life-producing organism, as a ‘sweet savor’ unto the Lord.” (T42)

“For the bodies of those beasts whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp.” (Heb. 13:11)

In Leviticus 8 and 9 nothing is said about the blood of the sin-offerings having been brought into the sanctuary (Lev. 8:15; 9:15); and yet the bodies of those beasts offered for sin-offerings were burned with fire “without the camp” (Lev. 8:17; 9:11,15). Note that this burning “without the camp” occurred despite the fact that the blood was not brought into the Sanctuary for sin. It was different with the sin-offering offered for the priest (Lev. 4:30) where the blood was brought into the Sanctuary (Lev. 4:5); and likewise for the sin-offering for the whole congregation (Lev. 4:13) when the blood was also taken into the Sanctuary (Lev. 4:17,18) in which instances the bodies of the animals involved had to be burned “with- out the camp.” (Lev. 4:11,12,21; Heb. 13:11; see also Lev. 16:14,15,27)

It should be carefully noted that the remaining sin-offerings of Leviticus 4 as for the ruler (Lev. 4:22) or for the common people (Lev. 4:27) where the blood was not brought into the Sanctuary, nothing is said about burning the animal “without the camp” (Lev. 4:31,35), but these were burned upon the altar in the Court.

Its head, body, hide, hoofs, dung, etc., were burned without the camp, setting forth in type, by the stench produced in the nostrils of those who stood near enough, how our consecration, in its outward manifestations—self-denials, etc.—would be looked upon and received by the world of mankind.

Only the inwards, kidneys, and the fat were burned upon the altar (Lev. 8:16). These inwards have to do with the life-producing, or as we might say, the life-sustaining. The liver is a blood purifier, but also serves to store food in the form of glycogen, to be thrown into the blood stream whenever the body might require it. The kidneys have the important function of eliminating wastes which if not removed would poison the system. These all, then, might represent the heart devotion which prompts the sacrifice. (T42) Fat burns with vehement flame, and is very quickly consumed. It is thus a most apt symbol of the zeal which must accompany the sacrifice.

The expression “without blemish” occurs frequently in connection with the sacrifices which were to be offered upon Jehovah’s altar (see Lev. 22:24,25); whether they be sin-offerings (Lev. 5:15,18; 6:6; 14:10); burnt-offerings
(Lev. 1:3,10; 9:2,3); peace-offerings (Lev. 3:1,6; 22:21,22); the passover lamb or goat (Exod. 12:5) or the red heifer (Num. 19:21). In fact, all sacrifices offered to Jehovah were to be “without blemish.”

“Thou shalt not sacrifice unto the LORD any bullock, or sheep (margin: or goat) wherein is blemish.” (Deut. 17:1)

“If there be any blemish therein, as if it be lame, or blind, or have any ill blemish, thou shalt not sacrifice it unto the LORD thy God.” (Deut. 15:21)

The only exception, seemingly, is for a free-will offering:

“Either a bullock or a lamb [margin: or kid] that hath any thing superfluous or lacking in his parts, that mayest thou offer for a free-will offering, but for a vow it shall not be accepted.” (Lev. 22:23)

While not forgetting that the burnt-offering was to show how God accepted the sacrifice (T45), let it be noted that the injunction that the sacrifice to be offered be “without blemish” is used in connection with the four different kinds of offerings, viz., the sin-offering (Lev. 4:23); the trespass-offering (Lev. 5:15,18; 6:6); the burnt-offering (Lev. 1:3,10); and the peace-offering (Lev. 3:1,6). The expression is highly significant, especially where the sacrifice of Jesus is represented.

In Lev. 9:2, the calf (bullock) to be offered by Aaron represented the perfect humanity of the man Christ Jesus—the “body” that was “prepared” for him (Heb. 10:5)—“holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners” (Heb. 7:26). This body he received at birth. However, if it was to be an acceptable sacrifice upon the altar of God at the time of Jesus’ consecration, that holiness, that harmlessness, that undefiledness, and that separateness from sinners, would have to have been faithfully maintained! It is one thing to receive perfection, and quite another to maintain it faithfully! Remember, if you will, that Lucifer was perfect in the day of his creation, until iniquity was found in him. (Ezek. 28:15) So too, it was with Adam!

“Without blemish” then, signifies that that which Jesus received from the Father at his birth—human perfection—he faithfully maintained in righteousness and purity, offering himself, in due time, “without spot” to God. (Heb. 9:14) How else could he have been an acceptable sacrifice for sin?

“The types which prefigured the sacrifice taught the same thing. The animal presented for the typical sacrifice must be the most choice of its kind— ‘without blemish’ (Exod. 12:5; Lev. 9:3; Exod. 29:1; Lev. 1:3). Had our Lord not been absolutely free from sin, he never could have redeemed us. It was because there was not one such spotless one among men, that no man could by any means redeem his brother, or give to God a ransom for him.—Psa. 49:7.” (R1186:6)

“Ye were redeemed not with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers. But with the precious blood of Christ, as a lamb without blemish and without spot.” (1 Pet. 1:18,19)

Part 6a—The Ram of Burnt-Offering

The rams of which there were two, constitute the sixth part of this consecration ritual. One of these rams was the “ram of burnt-offering.” It pictured the identical consecration already portrayed in the sacrifice of the bullock, but from a different standpoint—that of divine acceptance. It showed that the offering was made to God, and was accepted by God as a whole: it was completely consumed by the fire of the Lord’s altar, after Moses had “cut the ram into pieces, and washed the inwards and the legs in water.” (Lev. 8:20,21)

“Thus during the entire Gospel age Jesus and his body, the Church, are being presented, member by member, before God on the altar, yet all are counted together as one sacrifice. The Head was laid on the altar first, and since then all who are ‘dead with him’ and cleansed, as in the type, by the washing of the water,—through the Word—are reckoned as laid with the Head upon the same altar. The burning of the offering on the altar shows how God accepts the sacrifice, as a ‘sweet smelling savor.’ ” (T45)

This is the identical consecration depicted in the offering of the bullock, but from a somewhat different viewpoint—that of divine acceptance. A ram is a male sheep (not, however, a mere lamb). The Hebrew word ayil here translated “ram” has in it the significance of strength. But surely, physical strength is far greater in a bullock than in a ram. In fact, when the expression “sheep” is applied to a person today, it means that he is “a weak, bashful or silly fellow.” (Webster Collegiate Dictionary) Since, how- ever, the Scriptural word comprehends strength, we cannot disassociate it from this offering, but must conclude that in the symbolic sense, at least, reference is to a different type of strength—a strength manifested in meekness, patience and submission. (See Isa. 53:7; Acts 8:32,33.)

The ram itself was entirely burnt upon the altar. No part of it was burned without the Camp, nor was any part of it eaten by the priests. Not even its hide (in this instance) was reserved for the priests. (See Lev. 7:8) This is again the identical consecration depicted in the offering of the bullock, but from still another viewpoint—that of the effect it was to have upon those thus consecrated.

Evidently all of its blood was sprinkled upon the altar, round about, but unlike the bullock’s, it was not used to purify, nor to sanctify the altar. (See Lev. 8:15,19)

Burnt-offerings differed from all other offerings in that they were wholly burnt upon the altar of burnt-offering.¹ This was particularly true of such burnt sacrifices as were offered incidental to the consecration of the priest-hood (Leviticus 8 and 9), and in connection with the national atonement on the tenth day of the seventh month. (Leviticus 16) It was slightly different, however, with offerings made for the account of the people themselves, when the priests might retain the hide of the animal. (Lev. 7:8)

The manner of offering these sacrifices is outlined in Lev. 1:1-17. Note these verses:

“And the priests … shall lay … the head, and the fat … upon the altar. But his in- wards and his legs shall be washed in water: and the priest shall burn all on the altar.” (Lev. 1:8,9)

It should be noted that the “fat” is not specifically mentioned in connection with the “inwards” (Lev. 1:12,13), though we believe it is implied; for the term “fat” is generally identified with the “inwards” and often more particularly with the liver and kidneys. (See Exod. 29:13,14; Lev. 3:3,4,9,10,14, 15; 4:8,9; 7:3,4; 8:16; 9:10,19)

“And he brought the ram of the burnt-offering; and Aaron and his sons laid their hands upon the head of the ram. And he [Moses] killed it … And he cut the ram into pieces; and Moses burnt the head, and the pieces, and the fat. And he washed the inwards and the legs in water; and Moses burnt the whole ram upon the altar.” (Lev. 8:18-21)

Our suggestion is that “the pieces and the fat” is a synecdoche and stands for the “liver, kidneys and their fat” (Exod. 29:13; Lev. 8:16; 9:10) as the term “fat” is used in Lev. 16:25, where we read, “And the fat of the sin- offering shall he burn upon the altar.” Surely, in this latter instance, it could refer to nothing else but the “inwards” since it was the only part of the sin-offering that could be burnt as a sweet savor unto the Lord, upon his altar. (Lev. 16:27)

This affords us another most beautiful picture, since the type of Leviticus 8 clearly indicates that the bullock and the two rams, each respectively, represented both Christ and his Church. The bullock being the only sin-offering (here there was no goat), it illustrated the fact that we, the Church, are “accepted in the beloved.” (Eph. 1:16) But this feature of the type could not possibly show what is obvious to all—that the Church apart from Jesus, needed to be washed, cleansed, ere she could really be identified with Jesus in the sin-offering! Accordingly, God ordained that there should be a ram of burnt-offering to reflect this. It was but a single animal of which the head which represented Christ Jesus was first laid upon the altar, unwashed; then the body members which were, after being washed, laid upon the same altar, to be burnt together with the head, represented the Church.

¹ The expression “wholly burnt upon the altar of burnt-offering” when it applies to the burnt-sacrifice or burnt-offering of the people (not the priest’s), means, of course, after it was flayed, for the hide (skin) of such offerings was to be the priest’s who offered it for one such. Compare Lev. 1:6-9 with Lev. 7:8.

“The Head was laid on the altar first, and since then all who are ‘dead with him,’ and cleansed, as in the type, by the washing of water—through the Word—are reckoned as laid with the Head upon the same altar. The burning of the offering on the altar shows how God accepts the sacrifice as ‘a sweet smelling savor.’ ” (T45)

But there is still a further lesson for us here. The “inwards”—the life- sustaining organs, the liver, and the kidneys and their fat, and which are found within the body of the animal, and which represented our heart-devotions (T42)—were laid upon the altar as “the pieces and the fat” with the head, and all without being washed! (Lev. 8:20)

May this not be intended to reflect that, that which we (the Church) have to offer of heart-devotions, is not really our own, but his (Christ Jesus’). Surely, ours would count for naught without the imputed merit of Jesus. And did he not declare, “without me, ye can do nothing” (John 15:5)? He is the vine, we are the branches, and though the fruit appears on the branches, we never speak of it as the fruit of the branches, but as the fruit of the vine! Perhaps there is also a similar thought suggested in the fact that Israel’s High Priest on the Day of Atonement, offered the incense but once and that in connection with his own sacrifice—the bullock. Regarding this, Bro. Russell has said:

“So we might say that the incense which he offered up, in a certain sense and to a certain degree, represented the whole church, which is his body … Hence, in offering up his own perfections, he was offering up that which would, by imputation, be our perfection, as his members.” (R4922:2)

Part 6b—The Ram of Consecration

The other ram, the “ram of consecration” was then offered. It was undoubtedly to show forth the effect that this consecration would have upon us, the antitypical priests of God. Note how Moses, after he slew the animal, applied its blood not to the altar as he did with that of the bullock (Lev. 8:15) and of the ram of burnt-offering (Lev. 8:19), but to the person of each individual priest, thus showing that our consecration is an individual matter.

Evidently, the blood of this ram after having been caught in the pan, was placed on top of the altar from whence Moses took of it to put upon the ears, fingers and toes of Aaron and Aaron’s sons (Lev. 8:23,24; Exod. 29:20)—and then also to sprinkle of it ‘upon the altar round about.’ (Lev. 8:24; Exod. 29:20) What now remained of the blood upon the altar was mingled with the anointing oil and sprinkled upon Aaron and his sons, and Aaron’s and his sons’ garments, to hallow or sanctify them. (Lev. 8:23; Exod. 29:30)

“But in consecrating the typical priests the blood was not ignored. It was put upon all, upon the tip of the right ear, upon the thumb of the right hand and upon the great toe of the right foot, thus showing that the hearing of faith, the work of faith and the walk of faith must all be touched and made holy by an appreciation of the precious blood of atonement—the blood of Christ—the blood of the New Covenant. And then the garments of all the priests—their clean linen garments—were sprinkled with a mixture of the blood and the oil, implying that both justification through the blood and sanctification through the possession of the spirit of holiness are necessary in our consecration.” (R3280:4)

The ram whose blood was sprinkled upon Aaron’s sons after being commingled with the holy anointing oil (Exod. 29:19,21; Lev. 8:22,30), represented in the first place, the Lord Jesus himself, as our Redeemer (T46); and in the second place, it represented us, the underpriesthood, in our covenant or consecration unto death (T45) with him. Thus, in the first instance, the blood would represent Jesus’ blood. Surely, only this has the power to seal our pardon and to justify (Rom. 5:9) and make acceptable those who would consecrate themselves unto God and his service. Thus it is that “the cup represents his blood”—the blood “which seals our pardon.” (F466) As is obvious, the Church could not be represented in the blood of the ram in this sense at all.

However, there is a sense in which the Church also is represented in the blood of the ram of consecration! It will be remembered that Aaron, as well as his sons, had laid his hands upon the head of this ram of consecration as if to say, it represented all of them (T45). Just so antitypically, the blood of this ram must represent, as it were, the common-union of Christ and his Church, in the covenant of sacrifice—the faithfulness unto death, so beautifully depicted in the death of the ram of consecration. This is what the words of the Apostle Paul imply when he says, “the cup which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ?” (1 Cor. 10:16). This covenant of sacrifice pleases God, and therefore merits the anointing of his holy Spirit. For this reason we speak of the “blood” which so beautifully symbolizes the consecration unto death, as being “the blood of the covenant,” wherewith we are “sanctified,” (Heb. 10:29) or set apart as a priest- hood which in due time, enables us to become blessers of all the families of the earth. (T39)

“The Scriptures repeatedly mention the fact that we are justified by faith in his blood—in the blood of Jesus. They also speak of ‘the blood of the covenant wherewith we are sanctified.’ (Heb. 10:29) And again in Hebrews 13:20,21 we read, ‘Through the blood of the everlasting covenant make you perfect.’ How shall we understand this? Do these Scriptures all three refer to the same thing?

“No, these Scriptures do not refer to the same thing. The first relates to us as natural men, sinners, before we made our consecration to the Lord and became New Creatures. We, as members of the fallen race, were first justified by faith through the merit of Christ’s blood. This justification lifted us from the plane of sin and death condemnation, to a standing with God of life and harmony. From this standpoint we were invited to become joint-sacrificers with Jesus Christ our Lord—sharers with him in his great work for mankind, namely, the sealing of the New Covenant with his blood, and ultimately the blessing of the world during the Millennium under the conditions of that New Covenant. So, then, it was after we had been justified by faith in the blood of Jesus that we were sanctified, set apart, consecrated through or in connection with ‘the blood of the New Covenant’—by our consecration to be dead with Christ, to be buried with him by baptism into his sacrificial death—to drink of his cup of suffering, ignominy, shame, death— to partake of or share his blood—set apart or devoted to the serving of the New Covenant for Israel and the world. It was on account of our entering into this great engagement that the Heavenly Father sanctified us or set us apart, separated us from the world by begetting us to a new nature through his holy Spirit. ‘Ye are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.’—John 17:16

“The text cited in the last question, ‘The blood of the everlasting Covenant make you perfect,’ refers not to a perfecting of the flesh—not to anything which refers to us as natural men. It refers to us as new creatures who have been begotten of the holy Spirit; because, after we were justified through faith in the blood of Jesus, we presented our bodies living sacrifices, holy and acceptable to God as part and parcel of our Lord Jesus’ sacrifice and, under his Headship, to be associated with him in his sacrifice for the sealing of the New Covenant and by and by to be associated with him in the glorious work of establishing that New Covenant, after it shall have been sealed for the blessing of Israel and the world. It is through our obedience to our Sacrificial Vow to ‘be dead with Christ’ as joint-sacrificers in connection with the sealing of the New Covenant that we may become members of his body, the Vine. It is this sacrificing with him which will make us perfect as new creatures and give us a share with our Lord in his glory, honor and immortality. Thus we see that justification by faith in the blood of Jesus is the first step, by which believers separate themselves from the world according to the will of God; and that participation with our Lord in his sacrifice is the second step of sanctification. There could be no such step of sanctification, no perfecting as new creatures of the ‘divine nature,’ had it not been that God granted us the privilege of sharing with our Lord in his sacrificial death, in his work of sealing the New Covenant with his blood.” (R4495:3)

“When our Lord Jesus entered into a covenant with the Father, it was by the consecration of himself at baptism. This consecration was carried out and finished in his death on Calvary. There the shedding of his blood—the sacrifice of his life—was finished. There was no other way to fulfil his covenant. It was necessary that he do all this that he might enter into his own glory as well as be the Savior of the world. And we who have become his body members must make this same covenant with the Father. We are to drink with him his cup of suffering and death. We are to lay down our lives as he laid his down. Our blood is to be shed, our human lives are to be sacrificed, with his. There is no virtue in our blood other than it is made acceptable by the imputation, we, as members of his body, share in his sacrifice. So our death is like his, a sacrificial death; and our blood is counted in as his blood. Thus by partaking in the blood of covenant, the blood of the sacrificial covenant, the blood which is to seal the New Covenant, we are sanctified. This laying down of our lives is a gradual work, in its actual carrying out, as was that of our Lord’s. It is the work of sanctification, progressing until its completion in death.” (R5877:6)

In this initial consecration of the priesthood, before the sons of Aaron could receive the anointing oil upon themselves and their garments (Lev. 8:30) as a sprinkling, they had to be washed, and clothed (Lev. 8:6,13) and the animal sacrifices had to be offered by Moses on their behalf (Lev. 8:14- 29). The last animal to be slain was the ram of consecration (Lev. 8:22); its blood had to be put upon the tip of their right ear, the thumb of their right hand, and the great toe of their right feet (Lev. 8:24). Commenting on this Bro. Russell wrote:

“Thus by our consecration we are enabled to have the ‘hearing of faith,’ and to appreciate God’s promises as none but the consecrated can. Our hands are consecrated, so that whatsoever our hands find to do we do it with our might as unto the Lord. Our feet are consecrated, so that henceforth we ‘walk by faith,’ ‘walk in the spirit,’ ‘walk in the light,’ and even ‘as we received Christ, so walk in him.’ (Lev. 8:23,24)” (T45)

Perhaps in a sense we could consider the washing and clothing of the sons of Aaron as typical of that tentative justification which eventuates in the vitalized justification for those “called” and responding to become Jehovah’s “priesthood of blessing.” Such a tentative justification is never vitalized without the imputation of the merit of Jesus’ blood. This it is that is signified by the putting of the blood of the “ram of consecration” upon the ears, thumbs, and toes of the respective priests.

“In the Levitical types two consecrations are distinctly shown: … The first represents the general consecration to holy living and obedience to God which all believers make, and which by God’s grace, through Christ, accomplishes for them, tentatively, ‘justification of life’ and peace with God. This is what all true believers understand and experience in this age. But, as the Apostle explains, ‘the end of the commandment is love out of a pure heart’ (1 Tim. 1:5): that is to say, God foresees that our compliance with the terms of our justification during the present age will, in the end, lead us up to the second consecration as priests for sacrifice.” (F124)

“All the foregoing steps of the person desiring fellowship with God are proper steps, as outlined in the Word. We describe the person who has taken this course as being tentatively justified; that is to say, he is in the right course, doing what he is able to do to attain justification. While in this course, he would have blessings of mind and heart and the approval of his conscience, and would be favored of the Lord in the sense that divine providence would open up before him a knowledge of the proper course to take for his justification—pointing out to him the necessity of the steps enumerated, including the devotion or tying of himself at the door of the Tabernacle … That moment when Jesus, and when divine justice, through Jesus, accepts the sinner is the moment of justification.” (R5959:5)

It is when our justification is vitalized through the merit of the blood that we begin to understand what it means to have the ear that is attuned to the Father’s will, hands dedicated to the doing of His service, and feet dedicated to the walking in His ways. (T45)

Such a justification enabling one to know what is and to do the will of God precedes the begettal and sanctification of the Spirit. It brings one, as it were, to the place where Jesus always stood prior to his consecration at Jordan. Since our justification is to enable us to offer unto Jehovah a perfect humanity (perfect only through the imputation of Jesus’ merit), we become priests actually only after the acceptance by Jehovah of the sacrifice. As Bro. Russell so beautifully put it: “The High Priest came into his office by virtue of his work of sacrifice.” (R4877:2) On its acceptance by Jehovah, the antitypical candidate is begotten of God’s holy Spirit—sanctified.

To show that this sanctification could not be without the justification by way of the “blood,” the blood of the typical ram of consecration was mingled with the holy anointing oil before it was sprinkled over the priests. (Lev. 8:30). This, we believe, reflects both the vitalized justification (blood) and the sanctification (oil) of the spirit which bespeak for the antitypical priesthood the right to enter the covenant of sacrifice unto death!

“From the moment the sinner turned his back upon sin and began to seek the Lord and to walk as best as he would be able in the ways of righteousness—putting away the filthiness of the flesh—from that moment this person has a new mind or will, different from the mind or will which he had when he loved and served sin. This new mind is the new mind of the flesh, because he has not yet been begotten of the holy Spirit. At the moment that the High Priest accepts him, imputes his merit, and the Father begets him of the holy Spirit—at that moment this one with the new mind is justified and begotten of the Spirit; he is then a new creature … It was the new minded old creature that was justified, and at the moment of justification it dies sacrificially.” (R5959:6)

“The first blessing from the Redeemer’s sacrifice has been offered during this Gospel age to such as have the ‘hearing ear’ and the appreciative heart. This blessing is almost astounding. It purposes a still further blessing to such of mankind as turn from sin and accept the grace of God in Christ by faith, and present their bodies living sacrifices, with full consecration, vowing to walk in the footsteps of Jesus. To all such, during this Gospel age and until the completion of the elect number, the Redeemer will impute the merit of his sacrifice, in order to make their sacrifices acceptable in God’s sight—to the intent that they may suffer with him in the flesh, and share with him in the begetting of the Spirit now and in birth to the Spirit plane in the resurrection.” (R4591:3)

It is worthy of note that it was not until the sons of Aaron had been sprinkled with the blood of the ram of consecration mixed with holy anointing oil (Lev. 8:30; Exod. 29:21), that on the eighth day of the first month, for the first time, they were privileged to assist the high priest at the altar of the Lord! (Lev. 9:1,9,12,13,18)

“The High Priest came into office by virtue of his work of sacrifice. The bringing of the bullock into the Court meant its presentation for sacrificial purposes. So with Jesus. When he came to John at Jordan, He made a surrender of Himself. This the Father acknowledged. The disciples of the Lord presented themselves, but they were neither accepted as sacrifices nor begotten of the Spirit, until Pentecost. On that day, while they were waiting, God accepted the sacrifice, and made them priests at that moment.” (R4877:2)

“By the sevenfold repetition of the consecration ceremonies was expressed, in the most emphatic manner known to the Mosaic symbolism, the completeness of the consecration and qualification of Aaron and his sons for their office, and the fact also that, in virtue of this consecration, they had come into a special covenant relationship with Jehovah concerning the priestly office.” (The Expositor’s Bible, “Leviticus,” p. 212)

This ritual was repeated for seven days, and required that the altar be cleansed after each atonement:

“And thus shalt thou do unto Aaron and to his sons, according to all things which I have commanded thee: seven days shalt thou consecrate them. And thou shalt offer every day a bullock for a sin offering for atonement: and thou shalt cleanse the altar, when thou hast made an atonement for it, and thou shalt anoint it, to sanctify it. Seven days thou shalt make an atonement for the altar, and sanctify it; and it shall be an altar most holy: whatsoever toucheth the altar shall be holy.” (Exod. 29:35-37)

The initial consecration of Israel’s ancient priesthood involved a ritual which, according to Exod. 29:35-37, was to be carried on for seven days. If the language of verse 35—“Thus shalt thou do unto Aaron, and his sons, according to all things which I commanded thee: seven days shalt thou consecrate them”—is to be taken literally, then everything done on the first day was repeated on the following six. Some read this differently. They conclude that the repetition concerned only that part of the ritual specifically mentioned in verse 36: “Then shalt thou offer everyday a bullock for a sin-offering for atonement.” However, since this consecration involved the placing of the blood of the ram of consecration upon the ears, thumbs, and toes of the priests; and their being anointed, and sprinkled with the commingled blood and oil; and their waving of the offering, etc., it seems to me that all of the ritual was repeated each and every day during that week.

According to Exodus 29—which outlines the instructions given to Moses regarding this consecration ritual—it appears that the sprinkling of Aaron and his sons and their garments with the blood and the oil, was to have taken place before the ram and the unleavened cakes were placed in their hands, whereas the Leviticus 8 account (reflecting the actual carrying out of the ritual) places it after. (See Exod. 29:21-25; Lev. 8:24-30)

It is probable that in Exodus the order is subordinate to the emblems. In other words, all that was to happen to, or was to be done with, the blood is first completely set forth, ere the disposition of the ram is dealt with; and once the matter of the blood is completely dealt with, it is not again referred to in the remainder of the account. We therefore incline toward the thought that the actual order is that given in Leviticus 8.

Unlike the Ram of Burnt Offering, this ram was not entirely consumed by the altar; and unlike the bullock, no part of it was burned with fire “without the Camp.” It was the only offering (in this ritual) of which the priests were permitted to eat (Lev. 8:31). Yet, whatever of it remained uneaten by the next morning had to be burned with fire. (Lev. 8:32; Exod. 29:34) It was not then to be eaten either by them or any one else.

The Blood of the Ram of Consecration

“The partaking of the unleavened bread at the Memorial season, then means to us primarily the appropriation to ourselves, by faith, of justification to human life-right—a right to human life—with all its privileges which our Lord at his own cost procured for us. Likewise the fruit of the vine symbolized primarily our Saviour’s life given for us, his human life, his being, his soul, poured out unto death on our behalf; and the appropriation of this by us also signifies, primarily, our acceptance of restitution rights and privileges secured by our Lord’s sacrifice of these.

“Now let us note that God’s object in justifying the Church by faith during this Gospel age, in advance of the justification of the world by works of obedience in the Millennial age, is for the very purpose of permitting this class who now see and hear, who now appreciate the great sacrifice which Love has made on man’s behalf, to present their bodies a living sacrifice, and thus to have part with the Lord Jesus in His sacrifice—as members of his Body. This deeper meaning of the Memorial He did not refer to directly. It was doubtless one of the things to which He referred when He said, ‘I have yet many things to say unto you, but you cannot bear them now; howbeit, when it, the Spirit of Truth, shall come, it will guide you into all Truth, and will show you things to come.’—John 16:12,13.” (R5871:1)

Thus does the picture change for us, and the “cup which we bless” represents the communion (common union) of the blood of Christ. (1 Cor. 10:16) Just so is it here, for we must see that the blood of the ram of consecration which in the first instance represented our justification, in the second rep- resents our common union with Christ in the covenant of sacrifice.

This much is certain: all the animals had by this time been slain, so that the blood in any event must stand for the completion of the sacrifice—i.e., a faithfulness unto death. The anointing which Aaron received upon his head might more particularly represent the anointing which came upon Jesus at the time of his baptism in the Jordan. The holy Spirit then received was but the earnest of his inheritance. Full and complete possession of the inheritance would have to be earned by a faithfulness in carrying out his consecration vows, even unto death. During his ministry, Jesus referred to this consecration as a baptism not yet accomplished (Luke 12:20); but on Calvary’s cross he could declare, “It is finished.” (John 19:30) Then, like Israel’s high priest of old at the end of the Atonement Day, having offered himself for the people, he was privileged by way of his resurrection to change from the garments of sacrifice to those of “glory and beauty.” (Lev. 16:23) No longer was the spirit of his anointing the mere earnest of his inheritance, but it was now his full and complete and everlasting possession, never to be relinquished. The type (Lev. 8:30) thus shows by the sprinkling of Aaron with the blood commingled with the oil, how Jesus through faithfulness unto death would secure for, and unto himself, the inheritance accounted to him at the time of his baptism (consecration). What better picture could there be of faithfulness unto death than that of the death of the dedicated animals—the bullock and the two rams? (Lev. 8:14,15,18,19,22,23)

The fact that the sons of Aaron were sprinkled in this same way, has thus a further significance for the Church, for not only must she appropriate unto herself the merit of Jesus’ blood for her justification, but she must also become identified with Jesus in the consecration which is unto death. For her to live, will mean for Christ to live (Phil. 1:21); and her experience will be as was Paul’s—a daily dying (1 Cor. 15:31)—“always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be manifest in our body … always delivered unto death for Jesus’ sake, that the life of Jesus might be manifest in our mortal flesh.” (2 Cor. 4:10,11)

All the underpriests (even as was Aaron) were called upon to lay their hands upon the heads of these animals before they were slain (Lev. 8:14, 18,22), as if to say, “These, represent us.” So the whole Church, Head and body, is represented in the blood, and we the Church, secure for, and unto ourselves, the inheritance of which our anointing was but the earnest, by faithfully making up that which is left behind of the afflictions of Christ “for his body’s sake which is the Church” (Col. 1:24). Thus we are sanctified unto our heavenly inheritance “through the offering of the body of Je- sus.” (Heb. 10:10)

“We are sanctified through the offering of the Body of Jesus Christ, because we, accepted as members of his body, are set apart to this great priestly, kingly, mediatorial work with him. Incidentally, notice here that previously we were ‘justified’ through the merit of Jesus’ sacrifice, but that now we are sanctified through the offering of the Body.” (R4512:6)

Since both the sons of Aaron as well as Aaron himself placed their hands upon the head of the ram before Moses slew it (Lev. 8:22; Exod. 29:19), it did represent both Christ and the Church. (See T45) There is, however, a sense in which it must first represent Christ Jesus, and him alone! For Jesus, his dying as “the ram of consecration” was, as it were, the drinking of the “cup” which the Father had given him to drink (John 18:11)—for our justification. “Christ, our passover is sacrificed for us.” (1 Cor. 5:7) And he who was “holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners” needed no justification. But we did! Thus do we read:

“The anointing oil mingled with the blood of consecration was sprinkled over them (Lev. 8:30); teaching that our consecration is accepted only because we are justified by the precious blood of our Redeemer.” (T46)

Therefore the eating of the flesh of the ram of consecration and the bread in the basket (Exod. 29:32)—particularly the first “unleavened cake” without any of the oil (Lev. 8:36; Exod. 28:23)—by the sons of Aaron has about the same significance for us as the appropriating unto ourselves in the Memorial the merits of the man Christ Jesus.

“The partaking of the unleavened bread at the Memorial season, then, means to us primarily the appropriation to ourselves, by faith, of justification to human life-right—a right to human life—with all its privileges, which our Lord at his own cost procured for us.” (R5871:1)

Only after this are we—in response to the “high calling of God in Christ Jesus” (Phil. 3:14)—privileged to be identified with him in his cup. Suffering with him will afford us in due time (2 Tim. 2:12) the privilege of sharing his “glory, honor and immortality.” (Rom. 2:7) Thus do we read:

“This jubilation will be shared by all his disciples who have drunk of this cup first in justification, then in consecration and sacrifice with him.” (R5871:5)

Here then in this type of Leviticus 8 the oil not only represents the earnest of our inheritance, but also the glory which is to follow, when after suffering with him, we shall also reign with him (2 Tim. 2:12), when the oil of gladness which came upon Jesus 1900 years ago shall have run its full course and brought the complete body fully and completely under its sanctifying influence.

“Some dear friends think that we are laying too much stress on the importance of our drinking of the cup of which our Lord drank … Neither James nor John nor any one can sit on His throne unless he drink of Christ’s cup. Our opponents make a serious error in thinking that the Lord’s ‘cup’ symbolizes justification. On the contrary, only the justified by faith are privileged to drink of His cup. The cup symbolizes the means of our sanctification, by which we exchange our justified earthly rights for the heavenly inheritance and joint-heirship.” (R4547:2)

It is quite evident, that Bro. Russell is here endeavoring to counter the argument of his opponents, perhaps those who did not believe in the Church’s share in the sin-offering. It would be quite natural for these to say that the cup represented only justification. Jesus did say in this connection, “This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” (Matt. 26:28).

On other occasions, Bro. Russell seems to imply that the “cup” does represent justification but not using this term for fear it might be misunderstood. Surely, it is Jesus’ blood that justifies, ere we can even be sanctified. (R4331:3; R5871:5)

“The cup was symbolical and pointed forward to his own death. It was offered only to his followers, and not to the world. It was shed for them, and was the basis for their reconciliation to the Father; but it was to be in due time the blood of the New Covenant—the blood with which the New Covenant would be sprinkled, sealed, made efficacious. It was offered to the Church more than eighteen centuries before the time for the sealing of the New Covenant, to grant the Church in his sacrifice, not only in the sense of justification, but also in the sense of sanctification, or death with him.” (R4331:3)

“The blood of the Everlasting Covenant is the ‘blood of Jesus,’ his sacrifice, through the merit of which believers are now ‘justified’ under the Grace or Sarah Covenant.” (R4321:2)

“Note also in Heb. 10:29 it is the blood of the Covenant that sanctified and not the blood that justified that, sinned against … merits the Second Death. We are justified by faith in the blood of Jesus. We are sanctified by our consecration to drink his cup—the blood of the New Covenant.” (R4321:4)

There is but one blood—the blood of Jesus; yet, it is possible to view it from differing standpoints! It is only his blood that could be shed for the remission of sins. If by “the cup” we mean merely the joint-participation with Jesus, then of course, it could not represent justification. However, if we use the term in its broadest sense, it seems to us, justification is implied!

“From this standpoint we realize that his shed blood signified that his death was necessary in order that our condemned humanity might be restored to life without infracting the divine law.” (R4591:2)

Let us very carefully note the great accuracy with which this feature of the type was fulfilled at Pentecost. It was then and there that the waiting disciples received, as it were, the besprinkling of the commingled “blood” and “oil.” Not until the merit of Jesus’ blood was made available for their justification could they receive the anointing of the holy Spirit. Nor has it been any different with those called to be members of the Body of Christ—the Church, ever since. There is no anointing without the justification which comes by way of the shed blood of Christ Jesus.

Yet the commingled blood and oil must have a further significance, for not only was it sprinkled upon the underpriesthood and their garments, but also upon Aaron and his garments! Evidently, the blood cannot here represent justification because Jesus, who Aaron typified, needed not to be justified. Nor is it necessarily strange that in one instance where the anti- typical underpriesthood is concerned, the blood should represent justification and that in another, where Jesus too is involved, the blood should represent something different. Is it not so in our “memorial supper”? Does not the “cup” first of all represent for us something which it could never represent for Jesus—the blood whereby we are justified!

Part 7—Unleavened Bread

“The choice portions of the ram, its ‘inwards’ and ‘fat’ represented our heart sentiments, our best powers. These were taken into the hands of the priests and ‘waved’—passed to and fro before the Lord—representing the fact that a consecrated offering is not given to the Lord for a moment, a day or year, but we consecrate to continually keep our affections and powers uplifted, never ceasing until accepted of him as having finished our course, and Moses took the wave-offering off their hands (the priests did not lay them down), God’s acceptance being shown by fire. So we, the ‘royal priests,’ may not lay down or cease to offer all our powers in God’s service until God shall say, It is enough,—come up higher. When the love (‘fat’) of our inmost being is laid upon the altar, it helps to increase the fire of God’s acceptance. The more love there is connected with our consecration to God, the more quickly will it consume our offering.” (T45)

Upon this wave-offering Moses placed, out of the basket of unleavened bread: (1) “one unleavened cake,” and (2) “a cake of oiled bread,” and (3) “one wafer.” (Lev. 8:26) Here we have symbolized for us the three great fundamental facts of consecration, viz., justification, sanctification, and the hope of glorification! Without these, no consecration is ever complete.

“Consecration is another name for sanctification, and signifies a setting apart. Sanctification, consecration, is intimately related to justification, because, although there is a partial justification when one turns from sin to God, there could not be a full justification, a justification to life, until such time as the person had made a full consecration. It would appear, then, that from the time when one starts toward God, when he turns away from sin, and seeks to know and to do God’s will, there is a certain degree of consecration, setting apart to God, as in contradistinction to following evil. Each step that he takes toward God is a step toward sanctification and toward justification.

“His consecration takes place, therefore, before his justification to life. He must present himself in sacrifice before Jesus can accept him, before he can present him to the Father, that he may become one of his members. It is to be a membership in the earthly body of Christ, for suffering and death, and a membership also in the spiritual body, for life and glory. The sealing of his consecration will be the divine acceptance of that consecration, which is indicated by a begetting of the holy Spirit. And begetting of the holy Spirit is indicated by his appreciation of the deep things of God, as represented in the altar of incense and the table of shewbread; in experiences of chiseling and polishing, and by opportunities to serve. In some cases these various steps are taken almost simultaneously.” (R5410:3)

Aside from Jesus, every one of the “called” was born in sin, “shapen in iniquity.” (Psa. 51:5) But Praise the Lord, they came to a recognition of their own unrighteousness and utter inability to cleanse themselves in the sight of God. The cry of their hearts then became, even as that of David of old:

“Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy loving kindness; according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions. Wash me thoroughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from sin, for I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me.” (Psa. 50:1-3)

Here is evidenced a “broken heart,” the “contrite heart,” one which God could not despise, and which in his love and compassion, he submerged under the precious blood of Jesus for cleansing. This is the justification, by which we receive, or rather have accounted unto us, the perfect humanity that would be ours in the end of the Millennium, and which by the grace of God, we, like unto Jesus, are permitted to offer as acceptable sacrifices unto God. Thus in the type before us, we find an “unleavened cake” representing the actual righteousness and purity of the man Christ Jesus, and the imputed righteousness of the Church as men.

The perfect humanity of Jesus and his Church offered upon God’s altar of sacrifice would signify the destruction of their identities. To preserve these, however, God has by his spirit begotten them to a new nature—the divine nature! He has ordained, that for the time being, these may have the indwelling of his spirit in an earthen vessel. The purpose of this indwelling is, of course, their sanctification. By it they will be separated more and more from the world, and more and more unto God. So, in the type, the second unleavened cake, mingled with oil, represented the in- dwelling of the spirit of God—sanctification.

These “called” ones, justified and sanctified through the indwelling of God’s holy Spirit, have because of this, a hope of glory, honor and immortality, based upon the precious promises of God. (2 Pet. 1:3,4) It is the hope of glorification by which he that possesses it, purifies himself, even as he is pure. (1 John 3:3) Thus the third unleavened cake in the type represented our hope and faith in the exceeding great and precious promises of glory, honor and immortality. A wafer is generally quite thin: it is not transparent, but it is translucent! So is it with our hope and faith. We have in the precious promises merely the basis of the things hoped for, a conviction, as it were, of things not seen. (Heb. 11:1) (T46)

To complete their consecration, the typical priests were to remain within the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation (the Holy) for seven days, during which they were to fast from such foods as were common and proper for all the Israelites to eat. The priests, on the other hand, were to feast on the unleavened bread brought by Moses in the “basket of consecrations.” (Lev. 8:31-35) What a picture is this! The seven days well represent the complete, the full period, required for the completion of our consecration, i.e., until we have finished our course in death. During all this time, we are to remain within that state or condition so beautifully represented by the “Holy” of the Tabernacle of old—the “secret place of the Most High, under the shadow of the Almighty.” (Psa. 91:1) As spirit-begotten new creatures we are not to emerge for entry either into the antitypical Court or Camp. Violation of this injunction would be disobedience to the divine will, and make us amenable to death. Further, during all of this time, we are to fast, figuratively speaking, from all such “foods” as may be common and proper for all others to eat. We are to feast upon the “unleavened bread of Truth” supplied for our use in the “basket of consecrations” by God himself.

“The seven days of consecration (Lev. 8:33,35) showed again that we are consecrated to God’s service, not for a part of our time only, but for all of it. Seven, in Scripture, is a complete number, and signifies all or the whole of whatever it applies to … verse 36 shows the completion of the work of consecration.

“There never was a time when it was more necessary than it is now that all who are consecrated as priests should see to it that we ‘be dead with him,’ and our every ability waved before God, that he may accept and make use of our talents to his glory. Especially is this a matter of interest to those who understand the Scriptures to teach that very soon all the members of the body will be accepted with the Head, a sweet savor to God; and that the work of self-sacrifice being then finished, the glorious work of blessing man-kind and fulfilling the Covenant of God will begin.

“The antitypical consecrating of the antitypical priests is confined to the present (Gospel) age. It has progressed, steadily since our Lord and Forerunner ‘offered up himself’—and will be complete before this age has fully ended. And if we fail to be among the priests now, during the time of consecration, we cannot be of them when they begin their service for the people in the Kingdom, when these same priests (now despised of men, but a ‘sweet savor’ to God) will have the title of King added and will, with their Head, Jesus, rule and bless all nations. (Rev. 20:6) Do we earnestly desire to be among those who will sing to the praise of our great High Priest, ‘Thou hast made us unto our God, Kings and Priests, and we shall reign on the earth’? If so, we will be fully consecrated now, for it is only ‘If we suffer with him’ that ‘we shall also reign with him.’—2 Tim. 2:12.” (T47)

“Unleavened bread: three kinds of bread as to its form, are mentioned here, but all unleavened: #1. matstsoth, unleavened bread, no matter in what shape.1 #2. challoth, cakes, pricked or perforated, as the root implies. #3. rikikey, an exceedingly thin cake … properly enough translated wafer.” (Clarke, Commentary, “Exodus 29:2”)

Perhaps this “basket of unleavened bread” was intended to be a meal- offering, of a sort (Lev. 2:4,5,7), whose chief ingredient was flour. The liquid being water, and/or oil!

The first of these cakes, we may be reasonably sure, was made of flour and water, for oil is nowhere mentioned in connection with it. (Exod. 29:23; Lev. 8:26) This, as Bro. Russell suggested, “represented the actual purity of Jesus as a man, and the imputed purity of the Church as men … justification—for ‘the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in us’ so long as we are accepted members of his body. (Rom. 8:4)” (T46)

1. In his comments on Exod. 12:9, Clarke says: “Unleavened Bread: matstsoh from matsah, to squeeze or compress, because the bread prepared without leaven or yeast was generally, sad or heavy, as we term it. The word here properly signifies unleavened cakes.”

We cannot be too sure about the second of these cakes, since there seems to be some ambiguity in the Hebrew text, as the following translations of Exod. 29:2,23, and Lev. 8:26, clearly show:

It will be observed that some of these renderings favor the thought that the oil was mixed with the dough, or was used as the liquid ingredient instead of water. At any rate, all agree that oil was used; i.e., was in some way identified with this “second” cake of unleavened bread! Bro. Russell suggests that this cake “represented the indwelling spirit of God—sanctification.” (T46)

The third cake, most translators agree, was a wafer; but whether it was made like the first cake of just flour and water, or like the second with oil, is not so clear. However, the Hebrew text indicates very emphatically, that it was treated with oil in a manner quite differently from that in which the second cake was! Note the following renderings:

This third cake being a wafer while not transparent, was nevertheless translucent! How beautifully this, therefore, sets forth “our hope and faith in the exceeding precious promises of glory, honor, and immortality.” (T46) We see, as it were, through a glass “darkly” [dimly] (1 Cor. 13:12), but then, “face to face.”

“Without these elements it is impossible for our consecration to be complete; viz., Justification (purity), Sanctification by the Spirit, through the belief of the truth, and faith in the promised Glorification.” (T46)

Types Not Necessarily in Sequence

It is important to note that types do not necessarily follow a sequential order. God, we have found, is a great economist, and never is redundant nor wasteful with His materials. It is for this reason that we may sometimes find a number of different types—separate and yet a part of a single picture. This is what makes the exegesis ofttimes so difficult; and only the holy Spirit’s guidance can keep us from entangling ourselves. Bro. Russell warns us about this:

“The Divine arrangement which used Moses, Aaron, the tribe of Levi and all Israel as types is complex, so that the unlearned and unstable are in danger of wresting them to their own injury. Whoever will begin with the Passover type of deliverance of the first-born and proceed with the history of the typical people down to the time when they entered Canaan, and then turn to the death of Christ as the antitypical Passover lamb and attempt to parallel the experiences of the Church and the world with the experiences of Israel, will find himself thoroughly confused until he comes to understand that in Israel a number of types mingled and overlapped.” (R4498:3)

This is exactly what happens in Leviticus 8 (Exodus 29)—the type of the consecration of the priesthood of Aaron. In Lev. 8:12, we read: “And he [Moses] poured the anointing oil upon Aaron’s head, and anointed him.” From the context it will be seen that only Aaron was thus anointed. The underpriests received no such anointing upon their heads. However, if we consider Aaron’s body to represent the underpriesthood, then we have a most beautiful reflection of the fact that we the Church receive our anointing only because we are his “body” members, whose place is, of course, under the Head! (See Psa. 133:1,2)

We do also know that there is but one way in which we, who were born in sin, “shapen in iniquity” (Psa. 51:1), could become “body” members and partakers of his anointing. We needed first to be cleansed through the merit of Jesus’ blood, by faith in which, we were justified—“made right!” Only then were we in the position wherein we could consecrate unto death, a justified humanity. On the acceptance of this latter by the Father, we were sanctified through the begetting of the holy Spirit. That we could not receive the holy Spirit without first having received the justification by faith, is not shown in Lev. 8:12, but in Lev. 8:30, which reads: “And Moses took of the anointing oil, and of the blood [of the ram of consecration] which was upon the altar, and sprinkled it upon … his [Aaron’s] sons, and upon his sons’ garments.” Commenting on this, Bro. Russell said:

“The anointing oil mingled with the blood of consecration was sprinkled over them (verse 30) teaching that our consecration is accepted only because we are justified by the precious blood of our Redeemer; thus we are told that we are ‘accepted in the Beloved’—only— Eph. 1:6.” (T46)

Note, then, that we have thus two distinct representations of the Church in Leviticus 8: first in the High Priest, as his “body,” and second in the underpriesthood.

In the first of these types, it is not necessary to consider any of the animals offered in connection with the consecration ritual; for the type is complete without them. In the second, however, we do have to consider the ram of consecration (Lev. 8:22,30; Exod. 29:19,21) as representing Jesus’ own sacrifice on behalf of his church, so that it might be justified from all sin. (John 17:19; Eph. 5:25)

“Aaron, the high-priest, in laying his hands upon the head of the bullock to be sacrificed, declared that the animal represented him (Lev. 8:14) and, thus typified Christ Jesus, our great high-priest who gave himself a sacrifice for our sins.” (R1461:4)

If this was true concerning the bullock of the sin-offering, it was also true of the ram of consecration (Lev. 8:22)!

But we have now a third type, in which there is reflected the effect that our consecration to be the antitypical priesthood of God is to have upon us. Here we shall have to consider the ram of consecration, not merely as representing us, the underpriesthood, for did not both Aaron and his sons lay their hands upon the head of it? (Lev. 8:22) The blood, in this instance, symbolizes consecration unto death which, when accepted by the Father, merits for us, and as coming from him, the ability to hear, do, and walk acceptably in the way he before ordained for us. (Eph. 2:10) Thus do we read:

“The second ram, the ‘ram of consecration,’ showed what effect the sacrifice will have upon us … Aaron and his sons laid their hands upon the head of the ram of consecration, showing thus that it represented them. And Moses slew it and took its blood (consecrated life) and put it upon each separately, thus showing that our consecration is an individual work. And he put it upon the tip of the right ear, and upon the thumb of the right hand, and upon the great toe of the right foot. Thus by our consecration we are enabled to have the ‘hearing of faith,’ and to appreciate God’s promises as none but the consecrated can. Our hands are consecrated, so that whatsoever our hands find to do we do it with our might as unto the Lord. Our feet are consecrated, so that henceforth we ‘walk not as other Gentiles’ but ‘walk in newness of life,’ ‘walk by faith,’ ‘walk in the Spirit,’ ‘walk in the light,’ and even ‘as we received Christ, so walk in him.’—verses 23,24.” (T45)

The beauty of a butterfly’s wing is quite apparent to the ordinary observer. Yet, if he would see more than is obvious, he needs only to place the wing under the lens of a compound microscope.

“Although other insects have two pair of wings, no others have these organs so beautifully colored and relatively large. This color of the wings is due to tiny bodies called scales. If the wing of a butterfly is rubbed, the color comes off and the wing at that point loses its color. To the unaided eye this colored substance from the wing appears to have no definite form; in fact, it looks like the pollen from flowers. An examination with the compound microscope, however, shows that each of these tiny bodies has a definite shape. Each scale has at one end a tiny stem, but in other respects they vary considerably in form.

“The scales are attached in the following manner. In the membrane of the wing are openings into which fit the stems of the scales. The latter are arranged in rows and overlap something like the shingles on a roof. In spite of this arrangement it is evident that the scales are not firmly attached, since the slightest touch is sufficient to dislodge them. Rough handling was not apparently planned for in the construction of these insects.” (Peabody and Hunt, Elementary Biology, “Animal Biology,” p. 9)

To magnify the whole butterfly to this same degree would destroy its beauty by making his head and legs look very grotesque! This can be done with the “types” too! Consider, if you will, Leviticus 8 and 9. In these types it is logical to see that Aaron, the High Priest, represents Christ Jesus; and Aaron’s sons, the underpriesthood, the Church. In Leviticus 8 it will be noted that the latter are dealt with, as it were, independently of Aaron. (See Lev. 8:13,14,18,22,27,30,31) In Leviticus 9, they are represented as assisting Aaron. (See Lev. 9:9,12,13,18,20) However, it is also possible to isolate Aaron in these types, i.e., to set him apart from his sons, and as representing them (his body members). In doing so, the picture of Aaron is amplified: for the relationship of the body to the head is a much closer one than that of the high priest and an underpriesthood. In fact, we could say that individual identities are completely lost.

If Aaron is regarded as representing both Jesus and the Church, we shall have to eliminate the sons of Aaron as representing the Church; but we shall have to keep in mind the fact that the sacrifices made by Aaron, while involving his physical body, must be accredited to the head. In the antitype, it is Christ Jesus himself, who is carrying on the work of sacrificing the Church. (R4602:1)

When we consider Aaron in Leviticus 8 apart from the ritual, but arrayed in his garments of “glory and beauty,” we are viewing him as representing the glorified Christ, as God sees him—Jesus the Head and the Church his body. (T36, 38)

In studying the types we must be careful not to impose the amplified features upon the general type, else there is bound to be distortion!