02.04. The Court.

The Court.

We must now turn back to Exodus, where alone we can learn what would have met our eye, had we visited the court of the Tabernacle in the wilderness. Suppose we had taken a walk in the camp early on the morrow after the eighth day of Aaron’s consecration, remembering the events of the previous day, to the Tabernacle, erected in the midst of the encampment of the twelve tribes, we should naturally have directed our steps. Around it, and inside the area occupied by the different camps of the twelve tribes, we should have seen tents on each of the four sides of the Tabernacle, occupied by the three great families of the tribe of Levi. Fronting the court on the south side, the tents of the Levites of the family of Kohath might have been counted on the one hand, and an unbroken line of white linen curtains, to the extent of 100 cubits, would have met us on the other. Turning to the west side, the family of the Gershonites would have been seen in their tents, with an unbroken line before them of white curtains of 50 cubits in length.

Reaching the north side, on which the Merarites were encamped, an unbroken line of white curtains, for 100 cubits in length, would again have met the eye. At length, coming to the east side of the court, opposite to which the tent of Moses and those of his brother Aaron and his sons were pitched, instead of the hitherto unbroken line of white curtains, we should have found a hanging of blue, purple, scarlet, and fine linen occupying the centre of that side for 20 cubits in length, or about 30 feet, reckoning 18 inches to the cubit, the rest of it being curtained with white linen.

Here, then, was the entrance to the court. There was but one, and to see inside it, men had to come to that parti-coloured hanging; for the white curtains on the three sides were five cubits high, equal to about 7½ feet, precluding anyone but a giant from looking over them.

Entering the court by the hanging above mentioned, we should have found ourselves in an oblong enclosure of 150 feet say, by 75 feet, a holy place (Lev. vi. 26) as the white linen curtains would intimate. Immediately facing the entrance, we should have seen the Altar of burnt-offering, a brazen Altar. Directly behind that the brazen Laver to hold water, and behind the Laver the Tabernacle itself, to enter which both the brazen Altar and the brazen Laver must first be passed, significant of that which was needed ere entering the holy place of the Tabernacle of the Most High.

Let us look at these in their order. Fronting the entrance to the court, the Altar of burnt-offering met the gaze of anyone who would enter within. This altar was made of shittim wood overlaid with brass, of five cubits square and three cubits high. It was, it would seem, a hollow case (Ex. xxvii. 8), filled very probably with earth, when the Tabernacle was pitched at any of its camping stations in the wilderness. An incline of earth on its south side, in the place of steps, provided the needful ascent, by which the officiating priest could go up to do his work. Thus he must have been above the offerer and spectators. So we read of Aaron coming down from the Altar (Lev. ix. 22). Surrounding the Altar was a brazen grating, with rings in the four corners of it, for the poles of shittim wood overlaid with brass to be inserted, by which on its march it was borne on the shoulders of some of the Kohathites. Of two important things we are here reminded. First, that steps up to it had been forbidden, that the nakedness of the priest should not be discovered (Ex. xx. 26); and, second, that, poles to carry it being called for, there was intimated that the time for final rest had not come, nor had the place of rest been reached. Perfection had not yet been attained, and could not while the Tabernacle was in use. The Altar, then, as it was, had a tale to tell. Its subsequent history in connection with Israel is not less interesting as we trace it out. For, coming down for a moment along the stream of time, we read of the brazen Altar in Solomon’s temple (2 Chron. iv. 1), and again of the Altar in Ezekiel’s temple (xliii. 13-17). To the former there was no need of staves, for the place of rest had been reached, the mount in which the Lord would dwell. For the latter, steps will be made - the very thing forbidden in Ex. xx. 26, for then, by virtue of the sacrifice of Christ, the rich results of which the priests in that day will be enjoying, their nakedness will not appear. How interesting is this the reader will surely admit, casting its light on the value of that one perfect sacrifice, by which rest for Israel will have been for ever secured, and the nakedness of the priests for ever covered. No perfection apart from that sacrifice. No lack of it when enjoying the fruits of the death of God’s own Son.

Surveying Bezaleel’s Altar in the early morning, we should have seen the priest, clad in his linen garments and linen breeches, busily at work prescribed by the law. Rekindling the fire? No. That was never to go out (Lev. vi. 12). What, then, was he doing? He was re-arranging the Altar, removing the ashes resulting from the consuming of the evening burnt-offering, putting fresh wood on the fire, and laying the morning burnt-offering upon it. All night had the fire been burning, kept in by the evening burnt-offering. All night had God seen that which was well pleasing to Him. A little column of smoke had been ascending heavenward, which spoke to Him, whilst the people in the vast encampment were fast asleep. It spoke to Him of that which none could then understand but Himself, and which, indeed, none then really knew about. It spoke of the death of His son, of His self-surrender do God’s will. Never was the reminder of that to be absent from the eye of God. It was to be ever before Him. How this tells its tale of His delight in that sacrifice! We think, and rightly, of the way in which it has perfectly met our need. God thinks also of what it is to Him. The Altar then re-arranged, the morning burnt-offering was offered up, accompanied by its appointed meat-offering and drink-offering, viz., a tenth part of an ephah of fine flour mingled with the fourth part of an hin of beaten oil for the meat, or meal-offering, and a fourth part of an hin of wine for a drink-offering (Ex. xxix. 38-42). Thus was set forth in that daily burnt-offering, and twice each day, first in the morning and then in the evening, the death of Christ and His life on earth as a man, in whom God can find joy. Of this last, the drink-offering it was that bore witness. Had we stayed a little time longer, we should probably have seen an offerer approach with a sacrifice for a burnt-offering, or a peace-offering, or a sin-offering, or a trespass-offering, and have witnessed the dealing with the sacrifice, as prescribed in the Mosaic ritual. First, laying his hand on its head, he had to kill it, and, if it was of the flock, whether of sheep or goats, he would have taken its life at the north side of the Altar, the offal being deposited on the east side, by the place of the ashes (Lev. i. 11, 16). Then the priest, who ascended the Altar on its south side, would have dealt with the blood of the victim in the prescribed manner. That done the offerer would have prepared the whole, or the appointed part, for the Altar, washing, in the case of a burnt offering, the inwards and legs in ************ significant ** of the spotless holiness in Himself, and in His walk of the Lord Jesus Christ, nothing less than that being suited for God to make atonement for us. The whole victim, or the parts of it, now ready, the priest’s services were again in requisition, to lay what had been prepared upon the fire on the Altar, to burn it as a sweet savour. For whatever was consumed on the Altar of burnt-offering was a sweet savour to God (Lev. iv. 31), speaking to Him, as it did, of the willingness of His own Son to bear divine judgment, and to maintain untarnished the holiness and righteousness of God.

We have spoken of the offerer, the victim, and the priest as ordinarily quite distinct, though all three were needed for a sacrifice to be offered to God. And we see also that priestly work in sacrifice did not begin till after the death of the victim. The offerer killed it, except in the apparently abnormal case of the bird. The priest’s part was to deal with the blood, and to put the parts to be burnt on the Altar, to be thereon consumed. To this rule the ritual of the great day of atonement presents really no exception, since the High Priest, as representing his house, and representing also the people, killed, as the offerer, the victims. In the case of the true sacrifice, a great change was, however, to be marked. Then the victim, the offerer, and the High Priest were one person - the Lord Jesus Christ. How true was it, that the law, having a shadow of good things to come, was not the very image of the things. The priest and the offerer might in certain cases of old be combined, but the victim was always quite distinct. Who then understood that one man would combine in Himself all three, and be the true and acceptable victim before God?

Leaving now the Altar behind, and moving toward the Tabernacle, we should next have approached the brazen Laver, of the dimensions of which, the capacity, and shape we have no record, so different is this from the brazen Sea in Solomon’s temple, described minutely and at length in 1 Kings vii. 23-26. The use of the Laver for the Tabernacle, its place, and its material are however, distinctly stated. Its use was for Moses and Aaron and his sons to wash their hands and feet in the water it contained ere entering the Tabernacle, or before the latter approached the Altar, and that on pain of death if any of them neglected such ablutions. (Ex. xxx. 18-21; xl. 30-32). Ceremonial cleanness must characterize those who served God at the Altar, or entered His Sanctuary, for He is holy. Its place on its foot, or base, was between the brazen Altar and the Tabernacle entrance (xl. 30). Its material was of brass, or bronze, manufactured out of the metal mirrors offered by the women of the congregation (xxxviii. 8). The institution of it, both for the Tabernacle and the Temple, indicated a need, and proclaimed by the providing for that need the lack in the priests of that purity which was suited for God. In Ezekiel’s Temple a Laver is unnoticed. Can it be that, as the priest’s nakedness will then have been perfectly covered, so the need of ablution ere ministering to God will be a thing of the past?

Passing the Laver, the Tabernacle itself would have immediately confronted us. But ere we entered within it, a glance round the court would have been but natural. Gold, silver, and brass had been freely offered for the structure. As yet, however, we should have seen no gold, and after entering the holy place we should have found no brass; for the last of the brass used in this service was to be seen in the sockets for the five pillars, overlaid with gold, by which the hanging for the door of the Sanctuary was supported (Ex. xxvi. 37). Evidently there was design in this, brass without and gold within. Within the Sanctuary was displayed what God was in Himself as revealed in Christ. In the court there was seen what the individual needed, in order to approach Him. Here brass was exhibited in the Altar, the Laver, and the sockets of the pillars of the court, and of those five also on which the hanging for the entrance of the Sanctuary was suspended. It may well, then, be, as we think of the vessels in the court, that the brass, as has been suggested,* symbolised God’s righteousness in judgment, and the gold symbolised His intrinsic righteousness. There remains to be considered the silver used, both for the court and for the Tabernacle. In the former it provided the hooks and fillets on which the white curtains were suspended from the pillars, and covered the tops of the pillars as well. In the latter the sockets for the boards were made of that metal (Ex. xxxvi. 24: xxxviii. I7). Now, as all this silver was provided by the bekah, or half-shekel, which each man above twenty years of age brought as atonement money on his own behalf, we can readily understand how silver would speak to every thinking Israelite of divine grace, which provided atonement that he might be preserved alive on the earth. Of atonement, not of redemption, that silver was a witness (Ex. Xxx. I I -16; xxxviii. 25-28). We draw attention to the term atonement, for redemption and atonement are in Scripture distinguished, and should be kept distinct.

{*We have said, "as has been suggested," for the typical meaning of the metals, the gold and the brass especially, is a question of deduction, not of direct revelation. We quote from the one already referred to: "Gold is intrinsic righteousness in God’s nature - that which we approach in. Brass is the judgment of righteousness as applied to man; hence the Altar of burnt-offering was of brass, the Laver was of brass - one judged sin in a sacrifice, the other by the word. It marked the immutable nature of that judgment - God, who could not bear sin, must deal with it. What led me to it was: the sockets of the pillars of the court were of brass, and the fillets and hooks of them silver - what gave stability was judgment - was Gilgal work. The curtains separated the profane from the holy - God’s people, as with Him, from the world at large - their hooks on the pillars were silver and their fillets.

"I am apt to think this is grace as displayed in man - God’s grace; as the brass was God’s judgment - firm and immutable - so did grace secure, but it was the ornament; judgment in God’s ways secures, but it is their stability, and as the foundation God’s immutableness. Grace, in fact, is what all hangs on in its actual maintenance." - Notes and Comments on Scripture, by Mr. J. N. Darby (vol. i, page 321.)} Of God, then, and of His grace, and His righteousness, in connection with judgment, the silver and the brass could speak. Whether those outside the court could see the brazen sockets, may be questioned. But the silver which covered the tops of the pillars must have been visible, one would think, to those without as to those within, proclaiming to all that One, whose dwelling-place was within that enclosure, whilst holy and maintaining His holiness and righteousness, even at the cost of death sacrificially of the victim, was a God of grace, who provided atonement as required. And further, any who entered the Court could see that there was no way to the Tabernacle except by the Altar and Laver. The one who would draw nigh into the holy place must first avail himself of both of them. Not less instructive is it to remark that he must avail himself of these provisions in that order - first the Altar, then the Laver. Death, the death of a substitute, and that substitute able to bear divine judgment for others, must first take place, and be acknowledged by the worshipper availing himself of it, ere the Laver could come into requisition. The sacrifice must first be thought of, ere cleansing from defilement in walk for priestly service in the court or Sanctuary could avail. We know how true this is. For whilst the sacrifice of Christ can meet the guiltiest and the vilest, the Lord stoops to wash the feet of only His disciples. Of the brass we have spoken. Was it a mistake, or a matter without significance, to make sockets of that metal for the five pillars at the entrance of the Tabernacle, when all the rest of its sockets were of silver? How perfectly in keeping was this arrangement. For as the priest crossed the threshold of the holy place, he was again reminded of the righteousness of God in connection with judgment, which had to be fully met, ere he could disappear from the gaze of those in the court behind the parti-coloured curtain, which screened the entrance of the Tabernacle.