Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing (epiphany) of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;  Titus 2:13


(22) The house (v. 7) where the Israelites ate the lamb (as well as the Israelites within it) types God's family from the standpoint of the container being put for the thing contained, somewhat after the example of the temple and the priests ministering therein. It is also from this standpoint that the word house is used in this chapter interchangeably for the family and for the dwelling where the family lived. The blood of the lamb types our Lord's life laid down—death—hence His human merit, which consists of a perfect humanity, with its right to life and its conjoined life-rights, because of His perfect righteousness (1 Pet. 1: 18, 19; 1 Cor. 6: 20; 7: 23; Rev. 5: 9). The sprinkling of the lamb's blood represents the imputation of our Lord's merit (Lev. 16: 14; Rom. 3: 25, 26; 1 John 2: 2; 4: 10; Rev. 1: 5). It will be noted that there is a twofold imputation of our Lord's merit: (1) an imputation for us on the mercy seat by our Lord (Heb. 9: 24; 1 John 2: 2; 4: 10); and (2) an imputation to us by God after our Lord imputed it for us, which imputation to us of Christ's merit makes it become ours as a robe of righteousness (Rom. 3: 21-25; 10: 4; 1 Cor. 1: 30; 2 Cor. 5: 21; Is. 61: 10). The difference between these two imputations is this: The first satisfies God's justice for the Adamic sin and sentence and its resultant imperfections in us; and the second reckons to us a righteousness demanded by God's law from all over whom it extends; for God is not content that we be merely sinless, but that we have a positive righteousness, which, we being unable to furnish, God graciously provides for us. A second difference is this: Jesus makes the first imputation; God makes the second. A third difference is this: The first works forgiveness of sins; the second reckons us satisfactory to the Law in its demands for our obedience. A fourth difference is this: The first frees from the Adamic sentence; the second reckonedly makes us righteous in acts and character as Adam would have been had he not sinned, but continued in faithful practice of righteousness and holiness.



(23) Both imputations are set forth in the type, and that as follows: The two door posts in general type the two parts of justice, or the Law. The first part of the Law, or justice, is duty-love to God, which is the thankful good-will that by right we owe to God, with all our hearts, minds, souls and strength (Matt. 22: 37, 38). The other part of the Law, or justice, is duty-love to the neighbor, which is the good-will that we owe him, a good-will that goes out to him to the same degree as we would have him exercise toward us in thought, motive, word and act (Matt. 22: 39; 7: 12). One of these door posts represents that part of justice which is duty-love to God; and the other door post represents that part of justice which is duty-love to the neighbor. The sprinkling of the first door post, therefore, would represent Christ's imputing His merit to that part of Divine Justice which demands the sinner's death for violations of duty-love to God; and the sprinkling of the second door post, therefore, would represent Christ's imputing His merit to that part of Divine Justice which demands the sinner's death for violations of duty-love to man.


(24) But it is not enough that there is no death sentence against us; additionally we must have an actual or a reckoned righteousness—obedience to the Law's requirements to live out its charges, even as the sprinkling of the two side door posts was not sufficient in the type. Additionally the upper door post (v. 7), the lintel, had to be sprinkled. The lintel represents us in our humanity, physically, mentally, morally and religiously; and that it may have a positive righteousness, a fulfilling of the righteousness of the Law (Rom. 8: 3, 4), it is necessary that God impute to us Christ's righteousness, since we can work out none of ourselves satisfactory to God. This imputation of Christ's righteousness, which is called God's righteousness (Rom. 3: 21, 22), because God through Christ provided it and accepts and imputes it as our righteousness, is typed by the sprinkling of the upper door post,



or lintel, with the lamb's blood. Accordingly the head of each house in sprinkling the two side door posts represents God's having Christ impute His merit to Divine Justice for us; and in sprinkling the lintel he represents God imputing Christ's merit or righteousness to us. Thus the whole work of God and Christ in justifying us is pictured in the sprinkling of the lamb's blood on the lintel and door posts. The fact that the door posts and lintels of those houses alone were to be sprinkled (v. 7) where the lamb was eaten types the fact that only on behalf of those would the merit be imputed who by faith appropriated the antitypical Lamb. Praised be our God and our Lamb for this great favor to the household of faith!


(25) The charge to eat the lamb's flesh the night of Nisan 14 (this night—v. 8) types the charge throughout the Gospel Age to partake by faith of Christ's perfect humanity, His right to life and His life-rights; for appropriating by faith is one of the significances of symbolic eating (John 6: 40, 47; compare with vs. 50, 51, 53-57). In the references just made to John 6 we find that symbolic eating is paralleled with believing and the figures differ only in the things eaten. In the one case it is the antitypical Lamb; in the other case the antitypical Manna; and in both cases it is our Lord's human merit. As the lamb in Egypt could be eaten on Nisan 14, 1615 B. C. only, so only during the Gospel Age can our Lord's merit be appropriated by faith alone. In the Millennium it will be appropriated by faith and works. The charge to eat the lamb fire-roasted (vs. 8, 9) contains several ideas. The roasting of the lamb seems to represent, first, that the antitypical Lamb must pass through fiery trials to the utmost extremity, and, second, its symbolic nourishing qualities would not thereby be diminished. Flesh, being largely nitrogenous, if boiled, loses much of its nitrogen; hence boiled flesh is imperfect flesh and hence lacks more or less in nourishing qualities. To have boiled the typical lamb (v. 9) would, therefore,



type the thought that our Lord lost some of His human perfection amid His sufferings. Hence to eat the lamb boiled would represent that the partaker would believe Jesus' humanity imperfect, as those do who believe that He was Joseph's real son and that He was a sinner. The prohibition to eat the flesh boiled types our being charged not to believe that Jesus was begotten of a human father, that He was thus sinful and remained sinful, or that, while before perfect, yet amid His trial He failed to maintain His perfection. The charge not to eat the flesh raw types the thought that we should not believe that our Lord was not tried at all, i.e., did not under trial suffer as our ransom; for neither an antitypical boiled nor an antitypical raw Lamb would nourish us unto life everlasting. To type that we should not believe in such an antitypical Lamb, the type prohibited the lamb's being eaten raw or boiled (v. 9).


(26) Two other things should be eaten at the Passover supper: unleavened bread and bitter herbs (v. 8). These likewise are typical. Because of its corruption and corrupting effects leaven is a type of mental, moral and religious corruption—sin, error, selfishness and worldliness (Matt. 13: 33; 16: 6-12; Mark 8: 15; 1 Cor. 6: 6-8; Gal. 5: 8, 9). Leavened bread, therefore, would represent a condition of corruption by sin, error, selfishness and worldliness, and freedom from Truth, justice, love and heavenly-mindedness. Hence unleavened bread would represent a condition uncorrupted by sin, error, selfishness and worldliness, and full of Truth, justice, love and heavenly-mindedness. To eat the unleavened bread also types one's appropriating to himself, and practicing Truth, justice, love and heavenly-mindedness (1 Cor. 6: 8). This, therefore, implies that we study the Truth, spread the Truth and practice the Truth. To eat the unleavened bread with the flesh of the lamb types the fact that we are to study, spread and practice the Truth while appropriating Christ's merit as ours unto eternal life. The bitter herbs (literally—



bitters or bitter things), which modern Jews understand to be horseradish, an exceedingly bitter thing, were also typical. Of what? They must represent something connected with the Christian life. Since eating the lamb types appropriation of faith justification, and since eating the unleavened bread covers almost everything else of the consecrated Christian life, they must represent something connected with our justified and consecrated Christian life. Indeed, apart from the things represented by eating the lamb's flesh and the unleavened bread, there is but one other set of things connected with the Christian life—its passive features—trials, sufferings and persecutions, incidental to our appropriating Christ unto justification and consecration and to our study, spread and practice of the Truth. It is these bitter—trials, sufferings and persecutions, incidental to our justified and consecrated life—that are typed by the bitters of the type. Therefore, the Israelites eating the bitters type us undergoing and accepting the trials, sufferings and persecutions incidental to the justified and consecrated life. Thus viewed, the things eaten at the Passover supper type the entirety of Christian living.


(27) The charge to roast—not to eat, as some misunderstand the last part of v. 9—the lamb entire (v. 9), implied in the words, his head, legs and purtenance thereof, types that our Lord had to be tested at every point and proven faithful and sinless therein (Heb. 2: 10, 17, 18; 4: 15). Only so could He be the appropriate food nourishing us unto eternal life. The charge (v. 10) to leave nothing of the eating of the lamb over until morning types the teaching that we should not leave our justification and consecration feasting unfinished until the Millennium; for there will be no more faith justification working during the Millennium, no more Gospel-Age study, spread and practice of the Truth then, nor will there be any more suffering for righteousness and Truth during the Millennium. It must, therefore, be completed before the



Millennium begins, i.e., we must finish our faith justification and consecration feast while it is yet the Gospel Age; for those who begin this antitypical feast of the Gospel Age, and then do not finish it before this Age ends must pass into the Second Death (Heb. 3: 13; 10: 25, 26-29). Thus our full part of the feast must be finished during this Age, if we would gain life. But why is the charge given that what is left over until the morning must be burned? Is there a contradiction between the first and second charges of v. 10? We think not. This will be seen, if the antitype is permitted to throw light on the type. The thing that was forbidden was the prolonging of the feast into the morning, as the antitype shows. The charge was not that they should eat everything of the lamb before morning came. Each one was rather to eat as much of the lamb as he could and to do that before the morning. But if they were unable to eat the entire lamb by morning the parts left over were to be burned. The following considerations will clarify this subject: During the Gospel Age all of Christ's merit is not imputed; for that could be required only for those totally depraved—the Second Death class or those in the Adamic death state. But as in the Gospel Age no imputations are made for these classes, it follows that imputations are made for those only who have some fraction of perfection, i.e., for those only who retain some vestiges of God's image. Hence the entirety of Christ's merit is not used to justify those who during the Gospel Age come unto God. Hence some imputable merit will be left unimputed and unappropriated during the Gospel Age. This is that which is left of our Lamb's flesh uneaten. What is typed by burning those parts of the lamb that remained uneaten? We reply: making it cease to exist as an imputable thing; for when this Age ends Christ's merit will cease to be an imputable thing. The entire merit, then freed from the former outstanding imputations, through the death of all for whom imputations



of it were made, will then cease to be used for further imputations, that it may be used as an entirety for one general application for the restitution class: for its entirety will be needed to purchase dead Adam and the dead race in him, since those in the Adamic death state are totally depraved, and therefore all of Christ's merit will be needed for their redemption. Thus making the imputed merit cease longer to operate and exist as such is typed by burning the uneaten parts of the lamb.


(28) V. 11 describes the manner in which the Passover was to be eaten (thus shall ye eat it). In the type they were to eat it hastily and as ready to make an immediate departure as travelers from Egypt to Canaan. This types our energetic and rapid appropriation of our Lamb, unleavened bread and bitters, and to do so as such as are prepared for instant departure as strangers in antitypical Egypt and as pilgrims traveling to heavenly Canaan (1 Pet. 2: 11). The girded loins type that part of our preparation which is involved in our readiness to serve; the staff represents that part of our preparation which is involved in our using the Word of God as our support for the journey; the sandaled feet represent that part of our preparation that is involved in our cultivating the Lord's Spirit. All of these things show our fitness, our preparedness, for our journey out of antitypical Egypt to antitypical Canaan. The expression, It is the Lord's Passover, was to impress a most careful participation in the feast, since it was attended with dangers and difficulties, which difficulties from the above description we can see to be present in type and antitype, and which dangers we can see from the following verse. While the antitypical dangers and difficulties have existed throughout the Age, and the firstborn of Egyptian man and beast have been smitten with the Second Death throughout the Age, the picture now takes its transition from the entire Gospel Age and concentrates itself upon the Parousia and Epiphany night, during the first half of which



night the special feasting went on before the tenth plague began to be poured out at the middle of that night—1914. The dangers to which the firstborn of antitypical Israel's man and beast are exposed are the Second Death and the great tribulation which will punish antitypical Egypt's rulers, as are typed in v. 12. These dangers are the reasons ("for") for antitypical Israel's keeping the feast "thus," i.e., in the way antityped by the girded loins, sandaled feet and grasped staffs, and with energy, as typed by the haste of the typical feast. The first items of v. 12 having been already explained in connection with Ex. 11: 4, 5 above, it remains for us to study its last clause: "I will execute judgment on all the rulers of Egypt." These rulers represent the invisible and visible great ones of Satan's empire—the fallen angels and the civil, ecclesiastical, capitalistic, educational and social great ones of the present order of affairs. All of these will be cast out of their positions of power and influence and will be otherwise punished, as the antitype of Jehovah's judgments executed upon Egypt's rulers. Jehovah, being the God of perfect wisdom, justice, love and power, is the guarantee of this—"I am Jehovah!" The part of "this night" in which Jehovah is performing this is from 1914 to 1954. V. 13 shows what secures the Lord's firstborns: As the blood of the typical lamb was the sign whereby God passed over the houses of Israel where it was sprinkled, and spared their firstborn, so the imputed merit upon Divine Justice and upon antitypical Israel's firstborn is the token whereby God passes over God's family and spares its firstborn from the antitypical tenth plague, while He is by the great tribulation destroying the Second Death class, antitypical Egypt's firstborn of man and beast. Thus abiding in God's family, secured by the Lamb's blood, we are safe and secure from the destroyer. Praise God for this!


(29) Having given charge to Israel to keep the Passover in Egypt, the Lord now proceeds to command



(Ex. 12: 14) an annual commemoration (memorial) of the original Passover in Egypt and an annual feast that should be kept throughout the Jewish Age—for ever—literally: an age-lasting ordinance. As the original Passover in Egypt types our Lamb and the night of its celebration the Gospel Age, so the annual Passover, generally speaking, types the Lord's Supper, and the night of its observance—Nisan 14— types the anniversary on which the Lord's Supper is kept. As the annual Passover was to be celebrated throughout the Jewish Age, so the annual Lord's Supper is to be kept throughout the Gospel Age—even "till He come" (1 Cor. 11: 26) in the sense of being the Deliverer of all His own, even of the last member of the Church of the Firstborn; for as new creatures are to feast on the antitypical Lamb as long as they are on earth, so long, of course,' should they symbolize this at its anniversary. This consideration overthrows the thought of those who claim that after our Lord's Second Advent set in, it has been no longer necessary to celebrate the annual Lord's Supper. As in the annual Passover the feast was one to the Lord, so is our annual Supper a feast to the Lord—a solemn religious service celebrated to and for the Lord. But v. 15 shows that not only the one day (the Passover feast, Nisan 14) was to be celebrated, but thereafter a whole week was to be set aside as the festival of the Passover. This Passover festival of seven days represents the entirety of the Christian life with its joy and peace coming from a sense of freedom from the slavery of sin, error, selfishness and worldliness in any and all their forms, and of a participation in the privileges of truth, righteousness, love and heavenly-mindedness (1 Cor. 5: 8; Rom. 14: 17, 18). Thus do we celebrate our deliverance from the empire of Satan as a matter of our whole life's duration.


(30) While the feasting on the lamb was the chief thing in the type on Nisan 14 and the feasting on the unleavened bread and bitters was the secondary thing,



throughout the festival's week following Nisan 14 the feasting on unleavened bread was the main thing, and this is brought out in v. 15—"Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread." Above we pointed out that Israel's eating of unleavened bread types our appropriating truth, righteousness, love and heavenly-mindedness. So the week's feasting of unleavened bread types our lifelong participation in truth, righteousness, love and heavenly-mindedness, even as St. Paul suggests in 1 Cor. 5: 8. The charge to put away leaven from their houses types God's charge that we put out of our humanity sin, error, selfishness and worldliness in all their details. To put away leaven in the first day types our individually starting to put away the antitypical leaven at the very beginning of our Christian lives, and for the Church as a whole, to start to do this in the beginning of its Ephesian period. The Jews ever since before Christ's day have had a regular ceremony whereby the leaven is searched for, gathered and destroyed and thus the houses made free of leaven. A piece of cloth, usually of linen, is in the late afternoon of Nisan 14 placed on the table and the leaven is collected and placed on this cloth. The gathering is as follows: The head of the family lights a candle, which throughout the search he holds in his left hand, using it to lighten every nook and corner of the house, especially where leaven would likely be found. In his other hand he carries a brush, usually a goose wing full of its feathers, with which he sweeps together all the leaven that the candle light brings to sight. He carefully takes it to the cloth and places it thereon. After he has completed a very thorough and careful search of every place in the house, even under beds, and deposited the last crumb or piece of leaven on the cloth, he gathers together its four corners and then ties them securely so that none of the leaven can fall out of the tied bag so made. This done, he throws the bag of leaven into the fire, where it is entirely burned.


(31) We are not sure whence this ceremony originated,



whether it is of Divine origin or not, the Scriptures being silent on the form, though commanding the thing itself that is accomplished by this ceremony, even as vs. 15 and 19 and Ex. 13: 7 show, i.e., removing and destroying leaven from their houses. But from the fitness of the symbols we are quite within the bounds of truth and reason when we suggest that very likely God supervised the use of this ceremony, since its every detail, viewed from the standpoint of Scriptural symbology, pictures forth a set of things that antitypical Israelites do continually, especially in connection with the Lord's Supper. In this picture the Israelites' house types the humanity of the spiritual Israelites (2 Cor. 4: 16—5: 10). His searching for leaven types the spiritual Israelite examining himself for antitypical leaven (1 Cor. 11: 28; 2 Cor. 13: 5). The lighted candle well represents the Bible giving the light that reveals our antitypical leaven (Ps. 18: 28; Prov. 24: 20; Jer. 25: 10; Luke 15: 8; Rev. 18: 23; 22: 5).


Using the brush well represents our minds gathering within their grasp the antitypical leaven. The hands seizing the leaven well represents our wills gaining control of our antitypical leaven. Securing the gathered leaven so that none is lost well represents our keeping in an inescapable grasp and firm purpose the discovered leaven. Destroying the leaven represents our subduing, destroying, the antitypical leaven (1 Cor. 5: 7; 2 Cor. 7: 1; Gal. 5: 16-24; Eph. 4: 22, 25-31; Col. 3: 5-9). The fire by which the leaven was destroyed types the Holy Spirit, by which our antitypical leaven is destroyed (Rom. 8: 13; Gal. 5: 16, 17; 1 Pet. 1: 22). The main quality of the Spirit by which this is done is holy love (1 Cor. 13: 4-6; 1 John 4: 18). Faith and hope also cooperate therein (Eph. 6: 15; 1 Tim. 6: 12; 1 John 3: 3). Accordingly, we see that the symbology of this ceremony is entirely Biblical. If it was Divinely originated, its not being recorded in the Old Testament and yet preserved is somewhat akin to the Divine preservation of the names



of Jannes and Jambres, the Egyptian sorcerers who opposed Moses, but are not mentioned by name in the Old Testament (2 Tim. 3: 8).


(32) V. 15 prescribes a very severe penalty on the Israelite who would eat anything leavened from the first day until the seventh day, namely, death—"that soul shall be cut off." On first sight this penalty is likely to strike one as too severe; but its reasonableness becomes clear when we consider Israel as already being under the death sentence and God's purpose in the antitype. It is certainly true that if one continues to live after the flesh until he has undermined the new creature, he will die as a new creature, and that only as he through the Spirit mortifies the deeds— leaven—of the body will he live (Rom. 8: 13, 14). The Lord inflicted the death penalty on those who ate leaven during the seven days, and who were already under the death sentence in order to warn us against partaking of the antitypical leaven. Of course, eating of leaven during the Passover feast does not type one's sins, errors, selfishness and worldliness committed in weakness, such as all of us inevitably do; but it types his full and willful participation in these (Heb. 6: 4-8; 10: 26-29; 1 John 5: 19). These must die as new creatures, or youthfuls, or justified. It is to warn the new creatures against the sin unto death and to foreshadow its infliction on fully willful new-creaturely sinners that God arranged that death should be inflicted upon those Israelites who ate leaven during the feast of the Passover. These considerations make this severe penalty appear not too severe, but reasonable, especially when we remember that such an Israelite by virtue of the Ransom has an opportunity for life coming to him in the Millennium. Hence his death for eating leaven during the seven days was not a final one. The penalty inflictable for such offense regardless of when committed during those seven days types the fact that no matter when during the Christian life the



sin unto death is committed, whether early or late in it, the Second Death will be exacted therefore.


(33) According to the type there were to be holy convocations, gatherings, and specia1 solemnity throughout the first and seventh days, without any secular work whatsoever taking place, the only work allowable being that necessarily connected with their meals (v. 16). Here a double antitype seems to be intended: one referring to antitypical Israel as a whole throughout the Gospel Age and the other to each individual antitypical Israelite's whole life. Viewed from the standpoint of antitypical Israel as a whole, the seven days would correspond to the seven stages of the Church. So viewed, the first and seventh days would correspond to the Ephesian period, or the Jewish Harvest, and the Laodicean period, or Gospel Harvest, in both of which there have been holy convocations, holy gatherings—harvestings—of God's people and special solemnities, such as have marked no other periods of the Gospel Church. In comparison with these the other stages of the Church have been rather commonplace. This is one of the Scripture indications that far more were won for the high calling during the Harvests than during the other stages of the Church, and that in much shorter periods of time. Viewed from the standpoint of the individual antitypical Israelite, the first and seventh days of the Passover feast seem to type his earlier and later years in the high calling, the seed time and harvest of the individual Christian's life. Undoubtedly during these periods the most important gatherings and solemn privileges in grace, knowledge and service existed.


(34) The charge to perform no work in these two days, except what was necessary for matters connected with food, represents the Gospel-Age exhortation to a cessation from all unnecessary secular matters, except providing for things decent and honest, which was more generally taught and practiced in the Harvests than in the intervening times, as is also usually the case



in the earlier and later years of the individual Christian's life than in the intervening times. A prohibition to do other work in the other five days is not mentioned in this passage, but the direct prohibition of it on the first and last days being alone mentioned is perhaps due to the fact that God knew that in both applications of the type as a rule there would be less abstention from unnecessary secular things by His people in the intervening times than in the times expressly mentioned for the antitypes. Certainly, in the antitypical times from the standpoint of both applications there has been, as a rule, less of holy living, study and service and more mixing up with the world in the intervening times than in the antitypical first and seventh days, e.g., if we look at the reformers, Marsiglio, Wyclif, Huss, Wessel, Luther, Zwingli, Hubmaier, Cranmer, Wesley, etc., we will find more of a mixing up with secular things than appears in the lives of the prominent servants of the Truth in both Harvests. This was undoubtedly due to a decidedly less clear cut distinction in teaching and practice between the use and abuse of this world in those times than in the Harvests. Indeed, in those times the distinction between the real and nominal peoples of God was not usually clearly made; and God's real people ordinarily mingled with the nominal people as members of the same congregations in almost all cases and, of course, were correspondingly more or less thereby influenced toward using time, strength and talent for unnecessary secular matters. So, too, do the bulk of the Lord's people individually allow themselves to become less vigilant and faithful during the times intervening between the earlier and later days of their Christian life. It is almost entirely due to this fact that we have a Great Company; for if these in this intervening time had been loyal they would not have lost their crowns. The fact that the Great Company will in its individuals become loyal eventually is also indicated by the holy convocation of the antitypical seventh day.



(35) The repetition of the exhortation to use unleavened bread, both at the Passover in Egypt and at subsequent Passovers throughout the Age (v. 17), represents the fact that repeatedly would the exhortation be given to keep the real antitypical feast and the annual Memorial Supper with the antitypical unleavened bread—that of sincerity (pure living) and Truth (1 Cor. 5: 8). Certainly in the antitype there has been a very frequent exhortation to this thing. The reason given for the typical feast of the unleavened bread in Egypt and annually ("for in this selfsame day have I brought your armies out of the land of Egypt") applies for the original and the annual use of that feast; for such a deliverance deserved the original and annual celebration. The same is true of our two feasts, the real and the symbolic. Our deliverance from antitypical Egypt deserves to be honored by our Christian life, as the anniversary of the slaying of our Lamb justly deserves an annual symbolic commemoration of it, of our appropriation of it and of our Christian life according to it. Hence in both the type and the antitype a repeated exhortation to keep the respective feasts has been in order throughout the original feast and during the Jewish Age the annual Passover, and throughout the Gospel Age the real and symbolic feasts (in your generations for an Age-lasting ordinance—v. 17). "Exhorting one another daily!"


(36) V. 18 tells when the Passover should begin and end and how long it should last. To understand this matter aright we must recognize that the day of the feast on paschal lamb was the 14th of the month and was distinct from the seven days of the festival of Passover which followed it, from the 15th to the 21st inclusive. When the seven days of the Passover are referred to, the Passover festival, from the 15th to the 21st inclusive, is the subject, as distinct from the 14th, when the lamb was slain and eaten. Actually the entire celebration covered 8 days. While at the Paschal supper unleavened bread was eaten, leavened bread might



at the, day-time meals of the 14th be eaten, but not from the beginning of the 15th until the end of the 21st. It is for this reason that leavened bread was prohibited during seven days, but not during eight days. This is in harmony with the antitype. It was only the night, not the day, part of Nisan 14th that represents the Gospel Age. Hence during the day part of Nisan 14 leavened bread could be eaten, but with the beginning of Nisan 15 until the end of Nisan 21 (the seven days) leavened bread might not be eaten. These seven days represent from another standpoint the entire Gospel Age, while the day time of Nisan 14 does not. V. 18 shows that unleavened bread had to be eaten the night of Nisan 14, and vs. 15 and 19 show that during seven days no leaven might be eaten. Thus the antitype enables us to harmonize the eight and seven days in their relation to unleavened bread. The leaven was, accordingly, put away during the late afternoon of Nisan 14 (v. 15). We have already seen the antitypical significance of vs. 18-20, which repeat the exhortations given in vs. 8, 15, 16. Only one item not pointed out in those verses occurs in vs. 18-20. It is the stranger and the one born in the land (of Israel). As we have already seen, the land of Israel types the sphere of the Truth and the Spirit of the Truth. To be born in the land types that one is a consecrated person who is begotten of the Spirit, while to dwell in the land as a circumcised person, but not to be born there—the [circumcised] stranger—types one who is in the Truth and dwells in its spirit, i.e., he is consecrated, but has not been begotten of the Spirit. In other words, the Youthful Worthies are referred to by the stranger of v. 19, who are understood according to vs. 48 and 49 to have undergone circumcision. That the Youthful Worthies are typed by these is evident from their circumcision—vs. 48, 49 (Lev. 6: 29; 17: 12, 15; 19: 10, 33, 34; 22: 10; 23: 22; 24: 16, 22; 25: 6, 35; Num. 9: 14; 15: 14-16, 26, 29, 30; etc.). Thus willful sin makes a new creature



and a Youthful Worthy die as such. V. 20 repeats the exhortation both negatively and positively and means antitypically what we explained above.


(37) Ex. 12: 1-20 consists of the charges that the Lord gave to Moses to deliver in His name to Israel. Vs. 21-25 set forth a brief summary of Moses' delivering to the elders of the people the above-given charges. It is only the more important items of the charges that are mentioned in Moses' statement to the elders. From this we are not to construe that Moses did not deliver all of the charges, rather this is to be presupposed in him, who was as a servant faithful in all his house (Heb. 3: 5). Simply as a space saver are only the main items mentioned in the statements of vs. 21-25. That he told everything commanded him is evident from the fact that the Israelites that night observed everything that God commanded Moses to tell them. Moses' telling the elders (v. 21) of the people to draw out and take a lamb and then kill it types what we have shown above—our Lord's course that influenced the leaders of the Jews to set Him aside for death Nisan 10 and to slay him Nisan 14. For the details we refer to our explanations of vs. 3-6. Almost everything in v. 22 we already explained when interpreting v. 7. But there are three items in v. 22 that are new. These are the bunch of hyssop, the basin and the prohibiting of the Israelites to leave their houses until the morning. As our Pastor explains (T. 109, 1), the bunch or sprig of hyssop types purging. The basin types the doctrine of the ransom. Dipping the hyssop into the blood would type a mingling of God's cleansing power with the ransom merit for the purpose at hand, while the act of sprinkling types, as we have shown before, the act of imputing the merit either Godward or usward, according as to whether the sprinkling was applied to the door posts or the lintel respectively.


(38) To appreciate the prohibition of leaving the house until morning we must understand the general setting of the antitypes. We recall that, as shown before,



both the dwelling of the Israelitish family as well as the family itself types God's family. The door, of course, represents Christ, the means of access into God's family (John 10: 1, 7, 9). The typical door stands between its posts and lintel. So Christ stands between us and God's justice. His merit imputed for us to God's justice and to us by God's love keeps us in our place, borne up by God's justice and Christ, our door. Hence the whole situation as to the door, its posts and lintel, pictures our justification by faith in the promise of God to forgive our sins and reckon Christ's righteousness to us. This makes all subjects of that faithjustification—all who are in God's family—safe as long as they remain in that family, just as the Israelites were safe as long as they remained in the house, whose door was surrounded above and at the sides by the blood-sprinkled door posts and lintel. Thus we must abide in God's family, into which we entered through Christ, the door, by consecration, in virtue of a satisfied justice and our justification.


(39) But if any Israelite that night left the house so protected, he went out from under the protection of the blood and as a result perished; so antitypically if any of God's people now leave God's family by a repudiation of their consecration and justification they will also perish: the new creatures among them perishing as such (the Second Death), and the Youthful Worthies among them perishing as such (falling back among the unjustified sinners of the world), and the tentatively justified among them perishing as such (falling back among the unjustified sinners of the world). These trample under foot the blood of the Son of God and those of them who have entered the sacrificial covenant count its blood an unholy thing (Heb. 10: 28). To us the exhortation comes with peculiar force: Leave not God's family, and come not out from under the protecting blood of the Lamb of God who beareth the sin of the world. The charge not to leave the house until morning means that



entirely throughout the Gospel Age, until this Age completely ends, i.e., so long as there is yet a faith justification operating, God's people must remain under the imputed merit; and only after that merit ceases to operate toward each individual and he is safe in the possession of his inheritance may he give up trusting in the imputed merit for protection. May we all, whether of the Little Flock, Great Company, Youthful Worthies or faith-justified, as the case may be, abide vitalizedly or tentatively under that precious blood, our only safety during the night of antitypical Nisan 14.


(40) Already—above—have the thoughts of v. 23 been expounded, when we explained vs. 12, 13. So we will not here repeat our explanation there given. Also while expounding v. 14 we explained the thought of v. 24, though we might add that by the term, "this thing," in v. 24 the deliverance of the firstborn through the lamb's blood and partaking of its flesh is meant, even as the connection with v. 23 shows. This was to be celebrated annually by the death of, and feasting on the annual lamb, just as the annual Lord's Supper is an annual commemoration of our deliverance through our Lamb's death and of our feeding on Him (1 Cor. 11: 26). That the expression, "this thing," evidently does not refer to everything connected with the original Passover is manifest from several things in the typical and antitypical annual feasts. In the annual celebrations the lamb was not chosen on the tenth day, even as we do not choose the bread and wine on Nisan 10 for our annual Memorial. Again, in the later celebrations the lamb's blood was not sprinkled on the lintels and door posts, even as in the Lord's Supper there is nothing corresponding to this. Finally, in the annual Passover the lamb was not eaten with haste, just as we do not celebrate the Lord's Supper in haste. Accordingly, the thing referred to by the expression, "this thing," was the deliverance of the firstborn through the slain lamb and the partaking of his flesh. Hence the death of the lamb, the feasting on its flesh and the



deliverance of the firstborn, were the things to celebrate annually by the typical feast, and the antitypes of these by the antitypical annual feast. Additionally, our share with our Lord and with one another in suffering for sin is pictured forth in the Lord's Supper (1 Cor. 10: 16, 17)—a thing not typed in the annual Passover lamb or in its eating, though implied in part by the eating of the bitters in the original and subsequent Passovers. This proves that the lamb typed Jesus only, not Jesus and the Church. He only is the Lamb of God. Not only was Israel to observe the annual Passover in the wilderness (Num. 9: 1-15), but they were to observe it after entering Canaan (v. 25), both of which combined are typical of two sets of our conditions in this life, as travelers from antitypical Egypt to antitypical Canaan, and as enjoying our present inheritance as new creatures, while fighting and conquering our enemies preparatory to our gaining our future inheritance. These two kinds of possessing our inheritance our Pastor discusses in two separate chapters of Vol. VI, calling them our present, and our future inheritance respectively. These two forms of inheritance God gives His new-creaturely people (the land which the Lord will give you). The expression, "this service" (v. 25), refers to the slaying and eating of the annual Passover; and the charge for Israel to observe it types God's charge to us to observe the Lord's Supper (Matt. 26: 26, 27; Mark 14: 22-24; Luke 22: 19, 20; 1 Cor. 11: 23-29), since the annual Passover supper types our annual Lord's Supper.


(41) The last clause of v. 26 should be rendered, "What is [represents] this service to you?" The connection and the question imply that the inquirers were asking for an explanation of a symbolic ceremony. That the annual Passover ceremony, including the sacrifice of the lamb and the eating of its flesh, was a symbolic ceremony, is evident from the Lord's charge to Israel to celebrate annually the original slain lamb, its eating and the deliverance wrought by it for