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


we gather that the bullock of the burnt-offering was connected especially with the first three of the above-expressed manifestations of God's acceptance of Christ's sacrifice in relation to the faith justified.


(23) But the exact part that the two bullocks play for the antitype of v. 8 cannot be seen until we come to recognize the antitype of the meat-offering. In T 98, par. 4, the significance of the meat-offerings is brought to our attention. There our dear Pastor says that they represented praises and worship offered to Jehovah. When we speak of praising God, we mean saying and doing what reflects credit upon Him in His person, character, plan and works, just as, e.g., we would praise Mr. Edison when we say of him things that reflect credit upon him in his works of invention. We worship God, not only, as many think, exclusively by prayer and song, but we also do it by whole-heartedly serving Him and His cause. That worship means also such service is evident from the parallelism of Matt. 4: 10; and by what Satan wanted our Lord to do to him, i.e., become fully subject to Satan in service. The following passages prove that to worship also means to serve: Ps. 45: 11; Matt. 15: 9; Acts 18: 13; 24: 14; Heb. 1: 6; Rev. 11: 1; 14: 9, 11; 16: 2; 20: 4. How, then, is the antitypical meat-offering made? By serving God's cause through the faithful proclamation of His Truth, which reflects credit upon His person, character, plan and works. Thus the meat-offering is presented by ministering the Lord's Truth in a proper spirit. This is implied in the meat-offering as consisting of fine flour, typing spiritual food, mingled with oil, typing the spirit of understanding. Thus the meat-offering shows how the sacrifice is carried out, i.e., by faithful service on behalf of God in the form of proclaiming the Truth.


(24) In view of the fact that three forms of the typical sacrifices are in v. 8 brought to our attention, it might be well for us to look briefly by way of comparison



and contrast at all of the forms of the typical sacrifices and at what they type. We remark that each different form of typical sacrifice does not represent a different antitypical sacrifice; but different phases of the antitypical sacrifice, e.g., our Lord offered an antitypical sin-offering, burnt-offering, meat-offering, peace-offering, free-will offering, thank-offering and praise-offering. This does not mean that He offered seven different sacrifices. Of His own person He offered only one. Yet He offered the antitypes of the above-mentioned seven sacrifices. What do they mean? Seven different aspects of His one sacrifice, as follows: His sin-offering brings out the sin atoning character of His sacrifice. His burnt-offering brings out the effect of that sacrifice on God, i.e., it effects a manifested acceptance of that sacrifice on God's part. His meat-offering brings out the thought that He carried out His sacrifice by a ministry of the Truth which reflected credit on the Father in His person, character, plan and work. His offering His peace-offering brings out the thought that His sacrifice was a fulfillment of His vows and covenant of sacrifice, made by Him to the Lord. His free-will offering brings out the thought of His carrying out His sacrifice most voluntarily and willingly. His thank-offering brings out the thought that Christ's sacrifice was in harmony with duty-love, justice, which, exercised Godward, always includes gratitude as due to God, and which never was enacted out of harmony with such duty-love. And, finally, the praise-offering brings out the thought that Christ's sacrifice flowed out of, and was filled with disinterested love. The same phases of the Church's one sacrifice are alluded to by the types. Accordingly, the seven typical sacrifices do not type seven antitypical sacrifices, but seven different phases of the one sacrifice of Christ and the one sacrifice of the Church. Certain of such like phases will find their antitypes in the world's consecrated services during the next Age.



(25) With the above explanations we are prepared to understand the antitype of v. 8; and by that understanding we can see the wonderful connection brought out antitypically between vs. 7 and 8. The meat-offering of v. 8 suggests that its antitype is preaching a truth or truths that reflect credit on God; while the sin-offering referred to in connection with the meat-offering suggests the thought that this preaching is that of the atoning death of Christ; and the burnt-offering referred to in connection with the meat-offering suggests the thought that the involved preaching is that which explains how God manifests His acceptance of Christ's atoning death. This He does in connection with the stage to which matters have attained so far as v. 8 is concerned by promising through the pertinent preaching to forgive the repentant and believing sinner, to impute to him Christ's righteousness and to take him into friendship, fellowship, peace with God. The connection between v. 8, which symbolizes the preaching of the grace and mercy of God to the repentant, and v. 7, is this: While v. 7 brings out how the application of the Law to responsive sinners brings them to repentance, the next step is to preach the elements of the Gospel—those fundamental to working a justifying faith—to the repentant sinners, which is brought out in v. 8. Thus the antitype shows a most marvelous theoretical and practical connection to prevail between vs. 7 and 8. For was this not the order of the pertinent events in our own experiences, while we were on the way toward justification? Every consecrated person, looking back at the way in which he was drawn out of the antitypical Camp toward the Gate of the antitypical Court, recognizes that his experiences were along the line of the antitypes that we have suggested for vs. 7 and 8, which, of course, corroborates the exposition as factual. Our proof passages show it to be Scriptural.


(26) But let us look a little more closely at the antitype of v. 8, so as to bring into clearer view its antitypical



teachings. It is certainly true that after God's agents in fulfilling the antitypes of v. 7 brought us to repentance, they [these are the them of v. 8] certainly preached [the meat-offering] the fundamentals of the Gospel message connected with justification as the sole remedy for the lost undone condition, of which as repentant sinners we were made so grievously aware (Rom. 8: 3, 4; 5: 6; Acts 4: 12). Such preaching set forth God's love for the lost and condemned race for its salvation from the curse (Deut. 23: 5; Is. 38: 17; Jer. 31: 3; Eph. 2: 4, 5; Titus 2: 11; 3: 4; 1 Tim. 2: 4; 4: 10). It further set forth the fact that His love for the lost race was so great that He gave up His only begotten Son to death to become a sin-offering for the race (Is. 53: 4-12; John 3: 16, 17; Rom. 5: 6, 8; 8: 32; 2 Cor. 5: 18, 21; 1 Tim. 2: 5; 1 John 4: 9, 10). Such preaching also made known that Christ was sinless (Ps. 45: 7; Is. 42: 21; 53: 9; Zech. 9: 9; Luke 1: 35; John 8: 46; Acts 3: 14; Heb. 4: 15; 7: 26; 1 Pet. 1: 19; 2: 22; 1 John 3: 5). It then set forth the thought that He was suitable for a sin-offering (Is. 53: 10-12; Rom. 8: 3). Such preaching as to Christ as a sin-offering showed that He actually did die for our sins as a sin-offering on our behalf (Matt. 20: 28; John 1: 29; 3: 14-17; 6: 51; 10: 11, 17; Acts 20: 28; 1 Cor. 5: 7; 8: 11; 15: 3; 2 Cor. 5: 14, 15; Gal. 1: 4; 3: 13; 4: 4, 5; Heb. 2: 9; 9: 26, 28; 10: 12; 13: 11, 12; 1 Pet. 1: 18, 19; 2: 21, 24; 3: 18). And, finally, it set forth the thought that His sacrifice as a sin-offering was effective for propitiation (Is. 53: 4-12; Dan. 9: 24, 26; Rom. 3: 24-26; 2 Cor. 5: 19, 21; Col. 1: 20; Heb. 1: 3; 1 John 1: 7; 2: 2; 4: 10). Without any doubt, from Pentecost on to the present time, such preaching was made to the penitent by the agents that Christ has used toward them, and that we mentioned above.


(27) In setting forth the antitype of the sin-offering, the acts of God resulting from its presentation to Him are not included; and for this reason they are not



set forth in the preceding paragraph, which is limited to the things preached as the antitype of bringing forth the bullock of the sin-offering. These acts of God are set forth as the antitype of the bringing forth of the burnt-offering, which, as we have seen, types God's manifested acceptance of the sin-offering. These acts of God, as related to the faith-justified, and as stated above, are three: (1) the forgiveness of sins; (2) the imputation of Christ's righteousness and (3) the acceptance of the repentant and believing sinner into friendship. All three of these acts are the Father's exclusively; for He alone is the originating cause of justification (Rom. 8: 33), which consists of the forgiveness of sins and the imputation of Christ's righteousness, as a result of which two things peace—friendship—is established between God and those just justified. We are not to understand that v. 8, in telling of the bringing of the sin-offering, types Christ's death; for that death occurred before the antitype of v. 8 set in. If, then, it does not type that death, what does it type? We reply, it types the preaching [the meat-offering] of Christ's death (Luke 24: 47) from Pentecost on unto the end of the Gospel-Age; for let us remember that v. 8 types things done after ["then," v. 8] repentance has, according to v. 7, been wrought in the prospective Gospel-Age Levites. Hence the sin-offering of Christ was completed before the things of v. 8 could occur in the antitype. Nor does the bringing of the burnt-offering of v. 8 type God's manifestation of His acceptance of Christ's sin-offering, but the preaching of the thoughts descriptive of that act. But in the nature of the case the preaching of the thoughts that God works out in the acts of manifesting His acceptance of Christ's sin-offering must for each individual on the way to justification precede those manifesting acts themselves; for that preaching is the means of awakening a justifying faith, which must be awakened before justification sets in; and, as we know,



it is in the two parts-acts-of justification and its resultant peace that the manifestation of God's acceptance of Christ's sin-offering consists, so far as that act is related to the stage of matters treated of in v. 8. Hence v. 8 refers exclusively to the preaching of the truths on the antitypical sin-offering and burnt-offering, and not to the enacting of the sin-offering and burnt-offering. And this is typically shown by v. 8 connecting the meat-offering with the other two.


(28) Having seen that it is a fact of our and others' experiences, as well as a Scriptural teaching, that to the repentant sinner God caused the truths related to Christ as a sin-offering to be preached, we now proceed to show that it is also a fact that throughout the Age, according to our and others' experiences and the Scriptural teaching, the truths relating to God's manifested acceptance of the sin-offering, i.e., the antitypical burnt-offering, have been preached to the repentant at God's command. Such preaching we understand to be represented by the language of v. 8: "Then [after doing what is stated in v. 7] let them take a young bullock [for a burnt-offering; see v. 12] with his meat-offering, even fine flour mingled with oil." This fine flour represents the thoroughly detailed features of the pertinent truths presented and the oil represents the spirit of understanding with which these truths should be set forth. The first of these truths implied in the burnt-offering and meat-offering from the standpoint of v. 8 is that God as the first manifestation of His acceptance of Christ's sin-offering forgives the sins of the repentant and believing sinner; and the second of these truths is that to such sinners God imputes Christ's righteousness. These two truths describe God's act of justification; for God justifies one by forgiving him his sins and by imputing to him Christ's righteousness. By these two things the believer is brought into harmony with God's Law; for by forgiving him his sins God removes the condemnation of the Law for his past sins



(Rom. 3: 25, 26), and by imputing Christ's righteousness to him He makes him imputatively fulfill its demands that he be righteous henceforth (Rom. 8: 3, 4; 10: 4). Naturally as an outflow from such justification friendship (peace) sets in between God and him, as the third feature of God's manifesting the acceptableness of Christ's sacrifice for sinners (Rom. 5: 1). Accordingly, by justifying the believing sinner and receiving him into friendship, God plainly manifests that He has accepted Christ's sacrifice for sinners. How could it be manifested more clearly?


(29) That the Bible teaches that God's forgiveness of the repentant and believing sinner is a proof of God's acceptance of Christ's sacrifice for sin, is manifest from many Scriptures. The following are some of these: Is. 53: 10-12; Zech. 9: 10; 12: 10—13: 1; Matt. 26: 28; Acts 5: 30; 13: 38; Rom. 3: 24-26; 4: 7, 8, 25; 5: 9-12; Eph. 1: 7; 2: 13-16; 4: 32; 5: 2; Col. 1: 14, 20-22; 2: 14; 1 Thes. 1: 10; Heb. 9: 14, 22, 24-28; 10: 18; 1 John 1: 7, 9; 2: 1, 2, 12. That to declare such forgiveness of sins as a part of the Gospel message that God has commanded to be preached is a Scriptural teaching, is evident from the following Scriptures: Luke 24: 47; John 20: 23; Acts 1: 8; 2: 38, 39; 3: 19, 26; 4: 17-22; 5: 31, 32; 13: 38; 26: 16-18. Certainly such a message was by the Apostles preached, as many of the above Scriptures prove; and this same preaching was done throughout the Age. We who have passed through the experience of justification know that, after the Law had completed its work of effecting repentance in us, not only our Lord's death was preached to us as a sin-offering, but it was also preached to us that for the merit of that death God would forgive us our sins, if we exercised the necessary faith. Hence from experience we know that the preaching of forgiveness for the merit of Christ has been done, i.e., that this feature of Christ's burnt-offering has been preached (coupled with the meat-offering).



(30) We further know from the Scriptures and our and others' experiences that the second phase of Christ's burnt-offering has been preached (coupled with the meat-offering) throughout the Gospel-Age. That second feature of Christ's burnt-offering is God's imputing Christ's righteousness to the repentant and believing sinners. That God does impute Christ's righteousness to such, the Bible certainly teaches. Such a thing would have to be done in order to keep us in a justified condition; for the natural and Mosaic Law does not only demand the death of a sinner, but it also demands perfect obedience from all under it; and such an obedience we can render only imputatively, i.e., through the imputed righteousness of Christ. This is what those passages mean that teach that He is our righteousness and perfection (Rom. 10: 4; 1 Cor. 1: 30; Col. 2: 10; 2 Cor. 12: 9). This, too, is what those passages mean which tell us that we are justified by the faith [faithfulness, righteousness] of Christ (Rom. 3: 21, 22; Gal. 2: 16; 3: 22; Phil. 3: 9). Of course, such a righteousness could not be made ours instantaneously in any other way than by imputation. We can see how it could be made another's by the Millennial works, i.e., actually; for a thousand years of effort assisted by Christ's ministry could make it become his by works (Jer. 23: 5, 6; 33: 14-17); but it is impossible to become another's instantaneously, except by imputation; and since it does become ours the instant we exercise the pertinent faith, it must become ours by imputation. So the Apostles preached it to the penitent, as the above citations prove. So have others since that time preached it to repentant sinners. All of us by experience know that while we were in the condition of repentance the Lord caused this message to be proclaimed to us: God has accepted the sacrifice of Christ and will prove to you that He has, by imputing Christ's righteousness to you, if you heartily believe His promise so to do. Thus we know that the



antitype of the second feature of Christ's burnt-offering has been preached throughout the Gospel-Age.


(31) So, too, has the third feature of that burnt-offering (peace with God) been preached throughout the Gospel-Age. Sin in ultimate analysis is a repudiation and defiance of, and a rebellion against God. It by act removes one from subjection to God and makes one subject to God's enemy, Satan. As a result, it makes God an enemy of the sinner and it separates him from God so thoroughly that God no more has fellowship and friendship with the sinner. He is thus estranged from the sinner, holding Himself aloof from him. On the thought that sinners are abhorrent to the Lord the Bible gives us much testimony (Num. 22: 32; Deut. 25: 16; 32: 19; 2 Sam. 11: 27; 1 Kings 14: 22; Ps. 5: 4-6; 10: 3; 11: 5; 78: 59; 106: 40; Prov. 3: 32; 16: 16-19; 15: 8, 9, 26; 21: 27; Is. 43: 24; Jer. 25: 7; Hab. 1: 13; Zech. 8: 17; Luke 16: 15; Rev. 2: 6, 15). So, too, does it abundantly teach that God is by sin separated from the sinner, and holds Himself aloof from him (Deut. 31: 17; Josh. 7: 12; 2 Chron. 24: 20; Job 13: 24; 23: 3, 8, 9; Ps. 78: 59-61; Is. 59: 1, 2; 64: 7; Ezek. 23: 18; Hos. 9: 12; Amos 3: 2, 3; Mic. 3: 4; Luke 13: 27). One of the keenest griefs of the truly penitent is their consciousness of resting under God's displeasure and abhorrence, kept away from Him by His hiding His face, favor, from them (2 Sam. 24: 10; Ps. 38: 3, 4; Is. 64: 5-7). And one of the ways that God has of manifesting His acceptance of Christ's sin-offering, is the setting aside of His displeasure with the repentant and believing sinner and receiving him into friendship and fellowship. The following are some Scriptures that teach this thought: Is. 12: 1; 27: 5; 48: 18; 53: 5; Luke 1: 79; Rom. 5: 1; Eph. 2: 14-16; Col. 1: 20. And this fact has been preached [the meat-offering] by the Apostles (Acts 10: 36; Rom. 10: 15; Eph. 2: 17). This has been done by the Lord's agents ever since; and we know from



our own experience that while we were in the throes of remorse there was preached to us the comforting message that Christ's death avails for the taking away of God's displeasure from us and for making God a friend of ours. Thus we see that the antitypical meat-offering brought to us the assurance of this feature of the antitypical burnt-offering. Thus the Bible and our and others' experiences prove that every feature of the antitypical burnt-offering was preached to the prospective faith justified during the Gospel-Age.


(32) We again stress the thought that v. 8 refers antitypically exclusively to the preaching of those features of the Gospel that are adapted to draw the truly repentant into faith. It does not describe the effect of that preaching on them, i.e., its working faith in them and their exercising such a faith unto justification. It simply describes the part that God's animate and inanimate agents have to perform upon the repentant preparatory to their exercising faith. The effect intended to be wrought by their preaching, while not set forth in v. 8, is set forth in v. 12, as we will see when we come to the exposition of that verse. But as we consider the typical severing work of v. 6, the typical cleansing work of v. 7 and the typical taking in hand of the three kinds of sacrifices of v. 8, and then consider what has been set forth above as the antitypes of these, and furthermore compare these suggested antitypes with the pertinent Biblical teachings and the experiences of others and of ourselves, the harmony of all these things demonstrates to our hearts and minds that the Lord has given us the true understanding of the type. This adds to the demonstration of our Pastor's teaching on tentative justification as a favor that the Gospel-Age Levites have had from the Lord through faith in God's promises in view of Christ's sacrificial death for the world and, therefore, for them. We trust that our feast on the four verses so far studied in this chapter will serve further to whet our appetites for the



other good things of Divinely provided food that Num. 8: 9-26 puts on our well laden table. And our citing so many Scriptures above is to impress deeply upon our hearts and minds the great stress that the Bible lays on the truths associated with making responsive people Gospel-Age Levites; for while faith justification is not the main purpose of the Gospel-Age, as many mistakenly suppose, it is certainly fundamental to God's Gospel-Age work. Hence the great stress that the Bible in its typical and non-typical teachings thereon lays on it and all its associated, especially its precedingly associated, doctrines.


(33) We would naturally expect that the things recorded in v. 12 would follow immediately in this chapter the things recorded in v. 8; but for good reasons the things described in vs. 9-11 are introduced before those discussed in v. 12. The reasons are these: Some of the things in vs. 9-11 chronologically precede the things set forth in v. 12; yea, some of them even precede the things performed in vs. 7 and 8. Nevertheless, had they been presented entirely in their chronological order the antitype would not be so easily traced as from the actual order of their presentation, while the presentation in the order in which they are given does make the run of the antitypical thoughts more easily discerned. One of the thoughts that vs. 9-11 brings out is the publicity of the dealings with the prospective Levites in the type and antitype. V. 9 shows that all of the dealings with those who were about to be made Levites, who were about to be put under preparation for Levitical service, and who were about to be inducted into the Levitical service, were to be done publicly. When v. 9, in its first clause, says that Moses should bring the Levites before the tabernacle of the congregation, it charges that the entire service with the antitypical Levites should be done publicly, in the presence of the true Church, typed by the tabernacle (1 Cor. 3: 16, 17; 2 Cor. 6: 16; Rev. 11: 1, 2;



15: 5; Heb. 8: 2; 9: 11; Rev. 13: 6; 21: 3). Again, when the second clause of v. 9 says that Moses was to gather the whole assembly of the children of Israel, it types the fact that the things done to and for the antitypical Levites should be publicly performed before the whole nominal people of God in the antitypical camp. Publicity, therefore, was to mark both the typical and antitypical transactions with the Levites, as a Divine requirement.


(34) To make this clearer we remark that in the type and antitype there were three distinct things done with the Levites before they were ready to serve as Levites. Here, of the type, we use the word Levite, not to denote the non-sacred standing of Levi's non-priestly descendants before they assumed the standing of the sacred tribe; but we use it in the sense of their becoming and being this sacred tribe. To accomplish their transition from their standing as a non-sacred tribe to their standing as servants of the tabernacle, "My holy Levites," especially three sets of things had to be done to them: (1) the series of acts described in vs. 6-8, 12; (2)

their being waved as a wave-offering, as described in v. 11; and (3) their being directly offered before Aaron and his sons to the Lord, as set forth in v. 13. All of these acts had to be done publicly. The type plainly brings out the publicity of all three of these acts. And each one of these typical transactions has had its antitype and in each case the antitype has been publicly enacted. Furthermore, according to the typical teachings of v. 9, these three things had to be done before the new creatures, typed by the tabernacle, and before the world, i.e., the nominal spiritual Israel, typed by the whole assembly of Israel. And this certainly was done publicly before these two classes both in the ritualistic and non-ritualistic churches, members of which were not only the nominal-church people, but also new creatures, until



during the Harvest, when God has been calling them out of Babylon to symbolic Palestine.


(35) As we saw above, in the ritualistic churches, mainly by home teaching and by catechetical instruction, responsive sinners were brought to repentance and faith and thus to justification. And in such churches those who by the above methods were brought to justification were introduced to the attention of the entire church membership in their particular ecclesias, as undergoing such experiences as catechumen. But this was done in a still more impressive and public way by a solemn public rite that all of the ritualistic churches have practiced, i.e., confirmation. Practically every member of such ecclesias would be present at a confirmation service. We are not to be understood as meaning that all that underwent this rite were justified. Rather, only those who submitted themselves to their home and catechetical instruction in the way of repentance and faith attained to justification. Accordingly, such in their catechetical instruction and confirmation publicly were regarded as exercising repentance and faith by the new-creaturely and non-new-creaturely members of their ecclesias. And in their confirmation service they publicly confessed repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. And these antitypically as such were brought by our Lord before the antitypical Tabernacle and the whole congregation of antitypical Israel. This is true of all of them in the sense that each one in all ecclesias was individually brought before all the members of his local ecclesia. Furthermore, the same procedure in principle, but in a different form, was carried out by those who in non-ritualistic churches were brought through repentance and faith to justification. Here the main forms of influencing them to justification were home training and preaching. Other methods than these were, of course, used in both ritualistic and non-ritualistic churches, as pointed out above, but



above we have indicated the main ones used in both sets of churches, both relying on home teaching and each differing in the official method that their pertinent churches as such used, catechetical instruction prevailing in the one set, and preaching prevailing in the other set. The preaching was usually done by evangelists, revivalists and pastors. And such services were given wide publicity and were, as a rule, attended by the full church membership; and those who through such services professed to have been brought to justification, which would, of course, include those who really did repent and believe, were publicly noted as such by the new-creaturely and non-new-creaturely members of the pertinent ecclesias. Accordingly, in both sets of churches publicity before all church members was given to the repentance, faith and justification of those who really underwent these experiences. Thus they were brought before both the antitypical Tabernacle and whole congregation of antitypical Israel. When in more private ways people were brought to justification, they always made a public confession of it before their local churches. We will defer stressing the publicity of the other two acts typed in vs. 11 and 13 until we come to them in the discussion of these verses; but we here remark that they also were very publicly performed in both the type and antitype.


(36) Two important items are brought to our attention in v. 10. The first of these tells us that Moses was charged to bring, present, the Levites before the Lord. There are some who use the expression, "to present one before the Lord," to mean, to bring one into such a presence of God as is in heaven, where God is, and, as it were, into the throne room of Jehovah. This is the view that The Tower advocated on Job 1: 6; 2: 1, in an attempt to prove that Satan remained in heaven as a member of Jehovah's Court until 1914, when he was said to have been cast out of heaven. Since God sees everything and everyone, all things are



in His presence, no matter where they are; and, therefore, one need not be in Jehovah's throne room, in heaven itself, to be in His presence. That the expression does not have such a meaning in these passages of Job is evident from Lev. 16: 7; 1 Sam. 10: 19; Lev. 4: 15, 18; 8: 27; 14: 11; Num. 7: 3; 14: 37; 17: 7; Deut. 1: 45; 4: 10; Josh. 6: 8; 1 Sam. 1: 12; 2 Sam. 6: 5; etc., etc. In the foregoing passages and very many others the expression, to do this or that before the Lord, means to do something pertaining to Divine matters, under the Lord's special notice. And certainly that is the thought in v. 10. Certainly the Levites in the type were not brought before the Lord in the sense of being taken to heaven, even into Jehovah's throne room; but it was (v. 10) in connection with doing certain matters pertaining to God, under His special notice. And this certainly is true of the antitypical Levites. In their being brought to justification they were not taken to heaven into God's throne room; but they entered into doing certain things pertaining to God, under His direct notice. In their undergoing preparation for Levitical service after their faith justification they were also engaged in certain things pertaining to God, under His direct notice. In their being installed into their official work as Gospel-Age Levites, they certainly have been engaged in matters pertaining to God, under His direct attention. And, finally, in the performance of their Levitical service for God's Priests and people of the Gospel-Age, they certainly have been engaged in Divine matters, under God's direct notice. Accordingly, we understand that the charge that Moses bring the Levites before the Lord, types God's charge to our Lord to bring the faith-justified forward in a service pertinent to Divine matters, under the Lord's direct notice.


(37) The second item of which v. 10 treats is the Israelites' putting their hands on the Levites. In the Bible, the symbolic use of the expression, to lay hands



on a person or thing has three meanings: One of these is representation. Thus when Aaron and his sons laid their hands on the bullock in the consecration service (Lev. 8: 14), the act symbolized that the bullock stood for them, typical of how at the consecration of Jesus and the Church, their humanity stood for them. Again, when Aaron laid his hands on Azazel's goat (Lev. 16: 21), he thereby symbolized how that goat was a representation of him from a certain standpoint, typical of how when the World's High Priest began to deal with the antitypical Goat of Azazel, the humanity of the crown-losers was still part of the World's High Priest. These two illustrations sufficiently prove that to lay hands on a person or thing, among other things symbolizes representation. Furthermore, this expression symbolizes the bestowal of a power or gift. This is apparent from the fact that the gifts of the Spirit were symbolically bestowed by the laying on of the Apostles' hands, as can be seen from the acts of Peter and John at Samaria (Acts 8: 1524), of the company of the Apostles with Timothy (1 Tim. 4: 14), of Paul with Timothy (2 Tim. 1: 6) and of the doctrine as such (Heb. 6: 2). Then, too, this expression is Biblically used to represent sanction, endorsement, recommendation, vouching for, standing good for, as can be seen from 1 Tim. 5: 22.


(38) In which of these three senses does v. 10 use this expression as descriptive of the Israelites' acts with the Levites, as these acts are set forth in this verse? Evidently not in the first sense, because the Levites were not made the representatives or substitutes for the Israelites, though in a sense Aaron's bullock was such in the day of atonement service. But this is not anywhere set forth by the symbolic act of laying on of hands, nor could that act have been performed in harmony with the atonement-day picture. Again, this expression cannot mean the act of conferring the gifts of the Spirit; for nobody, apart from God and Christ,



except an Apostle, could confer those gifts; and the time for the conferring of them could not come until, after His resurrection, Christ had first ascended into heaven (Acts 1: 7; 2: 4, 12, 16, 33; Eph. 4: 7, 8). This leaves the third meaning for application here—sanction, recommendation, vouching for, endorsement, standing good for. Accordingly, by laying (literally, leaning) their hands on the Levites, the Israelites symbolized their endorsement of the Levites for their official work. This types how during the Gospel-Age the nominal people of God have endorsed the prospective and real faith-justified in the antitypical cleansing and consecrating for antitypical Leviteship. Thus the nominal people of God have endorsed the prospective faith-justified, when they exercised faith unto justification. They did the same when they made their public confession, whether this was by confirmation or by the less formal way of informing the assembled congregation of their experience or of joining the church as practiced among non-ritualistic churches. All of us recall how our course in the above stages was approved by the church members, who showed their endorsement by handshaking, by offering congratulations and by smiles and other looks, words and acts of approval, as well as often by voting the pertinent persons into church membership, in the local ecclesia.


(39) Furthermore, such endorsement was shown in subsequent stages of the antitypical Levite's consecration for Levite work. One of the stages was the preparatory or training stage. As we have learned, the Gershonite Levites represent those antitypical Levites (1) who helped people to justification (Libnites) and (2) who helped some to consecration (Shimites). To perform the first of such works, one would do evangelistic work, which was done by professional evangelists or evangelically working pastors or catechists, or lay workers, like Sunday-school teachers and superintendents, lay preachers, elders, class leaders or unofficial



church members. But to do such work properly one would have to undergo preparation. Sometimes this would be at theological seminaries, sometimes at missionary and evangelistic training schools, sometimes in the "school of experience." And the nominal people of God endorsed them in such preparation. Sometimes this was done by their financial support of such schools and of their students, sometimes by their praising and encouraging them during their period of preparation, and sometimes by holding them up as examples worthy of others' imitation. And, finally, they gave their endorsement by their electing and arranging for such antitypical Levites to be inducted into their office as such. This, e.g., can plainly be seen in the election and installation of Levites as pastors, evangelists, missionaries, catechists, Sunday School teachers, superintendents, lay preachers, etc., etc. The nominal church members, as a rule, voted their approval on such and in various other ways showed that they endorsed them for the antitypical Libnite Gershonite work to which they were chosen. They did the same to the Shimite Gershonites. These occupied themselves with leading people to consecrate, and thus they supplied new priests. As this work was done usually by pastors through special services, individual pastoral ministries and books, we see the antitypical Israelites endorsing these in such work by attendance on and financial support of such meetings, by financial support of such pastors in such work, in circulating the pertinent books and helping their writers in ways similar to those ways of supporting the antitypical Kohathite writers mentioned below. In all this they laid their hands on them.


(40) Above we illustrated how nominal antitypical Israel laid their hands on the Gershonite Levites. They did the same with the antitypical Merarite Levites. Their Mushite branch consisted of publishers of Bibles, and books, magazines and tracts on the Bible, together with their helpers. Their Mahlite branch consisted of



the editors and proofreaders of such literature, i.e., those who saw such publications through the press and supplied notes, prefaces, made corrections, etc., for them. The publishers of such literature, and their helpers were endorsed for such activities by word of mouth, by financial patronage and contributions and, in the case of denominational publishers, by election or appointment through the nominal people of God. Similarly did the nominal people of God act toward the Mahlite Merarites, the editors and their helpers. Nominal antitypical Israel endorsed the Kohathite Levites also. These are the scholars who have written: linguistic (Amramite), exegetical (Izeharite), historical (Hebronite) and systematic (Uzzielite) treatises on Biblical and Church and pertinent secular matters, or delivered lectures on such matters from the four standpoints just mentioned. These in their activities have also been endorsed by the antitypical Israelites, sometimes by financial help enabling them to support themselves while prosecuting the pertinent studies, favoring them with library facilities, buying, selling and recommending their books, supporting their lectures, etc., and in general encouraging them in their work. Thus we see how the antitypical Israelites laid their hands on the antitypical Levites at all stages of their Leviteship and how they did this with the eight main subdivisions of them. The facts corroborate our thought.


(41) The matters discussed in the preceding eight paragraphs put us in a position to note that what comes between vs. 8 and 12 is properly placed; because while some of the features of each of these verses reach forward to happenings coming beyond v. 12, in all of them there is a reaching backward to things in v. 8. It is doubtless this preponderance of things in vs. 9 and 10 referring to matters related to things discussed in v. 8 that prompted the Lord to put vs. 9 and 10 where He did in relation to the other matters discussed in this chapter. Doubtless another reason for so ordering the



subject matter of vs. 9 and 10 is that, placed where they are, they help to clearness of understanding of the antitypes. Certainly the study of Num. 8: 5-10 enhances in our estimation the pertinent types as prophecies "of good things to come," which is doubtless one of the reasons why God graciously blesses us with this enlightenment.


(42) We now come to the consideration of v. 11. As the margin indicates, the translation should be "And Aaron shall wave the Levites as a wave-offering before the Lord from the children of Israel, that they may be [fitted] to execute the service of the Lord." In paragraph (24) we should have brought out the significance of the wave-and heave-offerings; we will, therefore, do it here. In T 45, par. 2, the wave-offering of the priests' consecration is shown to represent the continuity of the sacrifice of the Christ, in that they persevere in consecration to keep their affections and powers uplifted even unto death in the Lord's service. The heave-offering of the Christ represents that the sacrifice of the Christ is given to God to exalt His holy name. In this verse, not the wave-offering of the Christ is typed, but that which Jesus makes of the Gospel-Age Levites as from the antitypical children of Israel. It will be noticed that in v. 13 Moses is said to make a wave-offering of the Levites. This shows that at least two wavings were made in the type, and we are to look for at least two distinct things as corresponding to them in the antitype. Careful consideration shows that there are at least two such wavings. In the type the first of these is set forth before the justification of the Levites is set forth, which, as we shall see, is shown in v. 12. We have seen that vs. 9-11 were inserted between vs. 8 and 12 in order to bring out some things which, in part at least, occur in the antitype before certain things in the antitype of v. 8 occur, though some of these things also come antitypically after the antitype of v. 12 sets in. Most of the things referred to in v. 11