exodus chapter twenty-eight overview of exodus … chapter twenty-eight overview of exodus chapter...

2011 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries

1

Exodus Chapter Twenty-Eight

Overview of Exodus Chapter 28 In Exodus chapters 26 and 27, the Lord gave Moses instructions with regards to the construction of the tabernacle and its furniture. Now in Exodus chapter 28, He gives Moses instructions concerning the attire of the priests and specifically those connected to the high priesthood rather than the Levitical priesthood which would come later. Both of which would officiate in the tabernacle on behalf of the Lord and the Israelites. These priests would minister in the tabernacle in several different ways: (1) burning incense on the golden altar twice daily. (2) maintain the lampstand (Numbers 18:3) (3) maintain the table of showbread (Numbers 18:3) (4) maintain and offer sacrifices on the altar of burnt offering (Leviticus 9) (5) bless the people (6) preside over civil cases (Numbers 5:5-31; Deuteronomy 19:17; 21:5) (7) instruct the Israelites in the Law (Deuteronomy 17:9, 11; 33:8, 10). (8) give encouragement in time of war (Deuteronomy 20:2-4). (8) function in the Holy Place (Exodus 30:7-10). (9) ceremonially inspect unclean persons (Leviticus 13; 14). (10) collect taxes from the people (tithes) (Numbers 18:21, 26; Hebrews 7:5). So Exodus 28 concerns itself exclusively with the sacred clothing of the high priest, which would be at this time in the narrative, Aaron and his successors who were from the tribe of Levi. These priests from the tribe of Levi would officiate over the offerings described in Leviticus 1-7.

The Levitical priests were: (1) Commissioned by God (2) Separated unto God (3) Allowed to come near (Numbers 16:5). The Lord gave them a perpetual priesthood (Numbers 18:1, 8). The priesthood began with Aaron (the brother of Moses) and was to be carried on by his natural sons (Exodus 28:1).

If you had any defects, you were disqualified from the priesthood and excluded from service in the Tabernacle of the Temple (Leviticus 21:17-23).

The Levitical priests were to be supported by Israel: (1) They received certain portions of the sacrificial offerings (Numbers 18:8-14). (2) They received one tenth of one regular tithe that Israel paid (Numbers 18:21-28; cf. Leviticus 27:30-33). (3) 13 cities were assigned to them (Josh. 21:13-19). (4) A special tithe went to them every third year (Deuteronomy 14:27-29; 26:12). (5) They were also given the redemption money for the firstborn in Israel (Leviticus 27). (6) The priests received a percentage of the booty of war (Numbers 31:25-27). (7) They also received a portion of the showbread (Levticus 24:5-9).

God has chosen the entire nation of Israel to be priests (Exodus 19:5-6). But when the nation failed, the Levites who backed up Moses (Exodus 26-28), were commissioned for the priesthood (Numbers 3:5-9).


2

The way the high priest and the priests dressed was no different from the regular citizens of Israel. The only time they dressed different from the rest of the people was when they were officiating over a ceremony (Exodus 28).

The most important day of the year for the high priest was the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16). He wore his ceremonial robes and entered the Tabernacle. He sprinkled the blood of the bullock of the sin offering for himself over the top of the mercy seat (Leviticus 16:6, 14). If he came out of the Holy of Holies alive, he was assured of another year as priest. He reentered the Holy of Holies a second time with the blood of the goat of the sin offering for the people to atone for them also. His return to the Israelites signified that he had obtained a pardon for the nation of Israel. The people were spared (Leviticus 16:30).

The priesthood was reorganized under David because of a population explosion. There were 24 orders. There were 16 orders who were descendants of Eleazar who were descended through Ithmar (1 Chronicles 15; 16:4-6, 37-43).

Succession occurred upon the officiating high priest’s death and the oldest surviving son was installed in the office (Numbers 20:28). The line was promised to pass down through Phinehas, the eldest son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron (Numbers 25:10-13). Eli was a legitimate priest and descendant of Ithamar but was not a high priest. The switch in the line took place during Saul’s reign. It was rightfully restored to the line of Eleazar during Solomon’s reign (1 Kings 2:26-27, 35). Seraiah was the high priest in Jeremiah’s day when the nation of Israel was under the 5th cycle of discipline (2 Kings 25:18-21). His son Josedech never inherited the office because he died in captivity at Babylon (Haggai 1:1, 14). His son Joshua entered the office when the high priesthood was restored in the days of Zechariah and Zerubbabel (Zechariah 3:1). His successors were Joiakim, Eliashib, Joiada, Johanan and Jaddua who showed Alexander the prophecy in Daniel concerning Alexander and consequently won his friendship to the Jews. Then following him were Onias I, Simon the Just and Onias II, Simon’s brother Eleazar who served because Simon’s son was too young. He was also known as Menelaus, an evil priest. Alcimus followed him and he was evil.

The priesthood was passed down to the Asmonaean family of the order of Joiarib (1 Chronicles 9:10; 24:7; Nehemiah 11:10). This line continued until Herod the Great destroyed it. The last in this line was Aristobulus who was murdered by order of Herod, the brother in law of Herod the Great. There were 28 high priests until the year 70 A.D. when the nation of Israel went on the fifth cycle of discipline. Annas and Caiaphas were the priests in our Lord’s day. The following is an outline of the chapter: (1) Introduction (1-5) (2) Ephod (6-14) (3) Breastpiece (15-30) (4) The High Priest’s Robe (31-35) (5) The Turban Forehead Plate (36-38) (6) The High Priest’s Tunic, Turban and Sash (28:39) (7) Garments for the Other Priests (40-43).


3

The NET Bible has the following comment with regard to chapter 28, “Some

modern scholars find this and the next chapter too elaborate for the wilderness experience. To most of them this reflects the later Zadokite priesthood of the writer’s (P’s) day that was referred to Mosaic legislation for authentication. But there is no compelling reason why this should be late; it is put late because it is assumed to be P, and that is assumed to be late. But both assumptions are unwarranted. This lengthy chapter could be divided this way: instructions for preparing the garments (1–5), details of the apparel (6–39), and a warning against deviating from these (40–43). The subject matter of the first part is that God


4

requires that his chosen ministers reflect his holy nature; the point of the second part is that God requires his ministers to be prepared to fulfill the tasks of the ministry, and the subject matter of the third part is that God warns all his ministers to safeguard the holiness of their service.”1 It might appear to some that an entire chapter is devoted to the garments of the priests. However, what the clothing symbolized was extremely important to the Israelites and God. The clothing expressed the fact that the priests were ordained to serve the Lord in the tabernacle as well as the Israelites. The sacramental wardrobe of Aaron and his sons spoke of their authority as well as the glory of the Lord. Exodus 28 concentrates on the clothing for the high priesthood rather than the priesthood in general. Leviticus 8 is specifically devoted to regulations concerning the priests in general. However, both chapters share many common elements since the high priest was not very much different than ordinary priests since the roles, ordination and equipment of both groups overlap. The priests would function as the Lord’s servants in the tabernacle in the sense that they serve both the guests (the Israelites) and the host (the Lord). The worshippers of the Lord in the tabernacle were his guests and the priests were the servants. The guests in the tabernacle worship brought their own food however but not because it was theirs but because they sought to honor the Lord. The meal in the tabernacle demonstrated that the Lord and the Israelites had a relationship with each other since only allies in the ancient world ate together and not enemies. Warren Wiersbe has the following comment with regards to Exodus 28, he writes “This chapter focuses on the clothing of the priests, while chapter 29 deals primarily with the consecration of the priests. As you study these two chapters, keep in mind that all of God’s people are priests (1 Peter 2:5, 9); therefore, the Aaronic priesthood can teach us much about the privileges and obligations we have as God’s priests. (Our Lord’s priesthood comes from the order of Melchizedek and not the order of Aaron. See Heb. 7–8.) Note that the priests ministered first of all to the Lord, even though they also ministered to the Lord’s people. The priests represented the people before God and ministered at the altar, but their first obligation was to serve the Lord (vv. 1, 3, 4, 41). If we would serve the people rightly, we must serve the Lord acceptably. The innermost garment of the priests was a pair of linen breeches (v. 42), which was covered with a fine linen coat (vv. 39–41). Over these the high priest wore the blue robe of the ephod (VV. 31–35), and over that the ephod itself and the holy breastplate (vv. 6–30). The high priest also wore a linen turban (mitre) with a golden plate on it that read ‘holiness to the Lord’ (vv. 36–38).”2 1 Biblical Studies Press. (2006; 2006). The NET Bible First Edition Notes (Ex 28:1). Biblical Studies Press. 2 Wiersbe, W. W. (1993). Wiersbe's expository outlines on the Old Testament (Ex 28:1). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.


5

Exodus 28:1-5: Introduction

Exodus 28:1 “Then bring near to yourself Aaron your brother, and his sons with him, from among the sons of Israel, to minister as priest to Me—Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar, Aaron’s sons. 2 You shall make holy garments for Aaron your brother, for glory and for beauty. 3 You shall speak to all the skillful persons whom I have endowed with the spirit of wisdom, that they make Aaron’s garments to consecrate him, that he may minister as priest to Me. 4 These are the garments which they shall make: a breastpiece and an ephod and a robe and a tunic of checkered work, a turban and a sash, and they shall make holy garments for Aaron your brother and his sons, that he may minister as priest to Me. 5 They shall take the gold and the blue and the purple and the scarlet material and the fine linen.” (NASB95) Verse 1 teaches that the priesthood in Israel was inherited or in other words, it was to be passed down from generation to generation within a family and specifically within the family of Moses’ brother Aaron. It was not be an office that was purchased (cf. 2 Chronicles 13:9-10), nor was a person elected to the office. It was not assumed through power or influence (2 Chronicles 26:16-21). Only God could make a person a priest and it was not by human choice.

The name “Aaron” is more than likely an Egyptian name since it does not seem to have any specific meaning in Hebrew or the Canaanite language. In fact, the name of Moses and Miriam appear to be Egyptian names as well for the same reason. The fact that the Lord has to identify Aaron as Moses’ brother when talking to Moses indicates that the name “Aaron” was common among other Israelites and non-Israelites who were part of the mob which left Egypt (12:38).

Vestments signified authority in the ancient world. Since there was no monarchy in ancient Israel, the garments of the high priest would serve to indicate that he was the leader of the people (cf. Zechariah 3:5-7; Matthew 26:65). The garments worn by Aaron and his sons conferred dignity and authority upon them, which a king would have worn in other cultures. The garments of the high priest in ancient Israel would confirm his role as the representative of the Lord with regards to worship. Verse 1 identifies the priestly succession in that the Lord personally names who will follow Aaron upon his death, namely Nadab, followed by Abihu, Eleazar and then Ithamar.

Nadab has already been mentioned in Exodus 6:23 and 24:1. He also appears in the story of his death recorded in Leviticus 10, which partly retold in Numbers 3; 26. (cf. also Numbers 3:2; 26:60). Abihu is always mentioned in connection with Nadab. Eleazar and Ithamar became the replacements for Nadab and Abihu after their death. Eleazar and his descendants also had special tabernacle maintenance


6

responsibilities (Numbers 4:16), which were not assigned to the descendants of Aaron in general.

In verses 2-5, the Lord gives Moses the names of the six most important of the eight priestly garments which He would require for Aaron and his sons to wear. He would describe these garments later during the chapter in greater detail. These verses are presenting a sort of overview for the rest of the chapter, which would be followed by specific details during the course of the chapter. Interestingly, the same fabrics and colors that would be used to make the priestly garments would be used in making the inner curtains and entrance curtain of the tabernacle. This emphasizes that these fabrics and clothing were to reflect the dignity and honor of the office of the high priest as well as the tabernacle itself.

Wenham writes “Essentially a uniform draws attention to the office or function of a person, as opposed to his individual personality. It emphasizes his job rather than his name … Furthermore, we can see that, in general, the more prestigious the office, the more splendid the uniform … In putting on these clothes [Aaron] took to himself all the honor and glory of the high-priesthood. In a religion the principal doctrine of which was the holiness of God, the high priest, who mediated atonement between God and man, was an extremely important person. His glorious


7

clothing symbolized the significance of his office.” (G. Wenham, Leviticus, NICOT [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979], 138–39)3 The NET Bible has the following note “W. C. Kaiser (“Exodus,” EBC 2:465), quoting the NIV’s ‘to give him dignity and honor,’ says that these clothes were to exalt the office of the high priest as well as beautify the worship of God (which explains more of what the text has than the NIV rendering). The meaning of the word ‘glory’ has much to do with the importance of the office, to be sure, but in Exodus the word has been used also for the brilliance of the presence of Yahweh, and so the magnificence of these garments might indeed strike the worshiper with the sense of the exaltation of the service.” 4

The phrase “the holy garments” would represent the fact that Aaron and his sons were set apart exclusively for the priesthood in order to serve the Lord and the Israelites. This phrase emphasizes that the garments that the priests would wear represented the honor and dignity and authority of the office they would hold. Exodus 28:6-14: Ephod

Exodus 28:6 “They shall also make the ephod of gold, of blue and purple and scarlet material and fine twisted linen, the work of the skillful workman. 7 It shall have two shoulder pieces joined to its two ends, that it may be joined. 8 The skillfully woven band, which is on it, shall be like its workmanship, of the same material: of gold, of blue and purple and scarlet material and fine twisted linen. 9 You shall take two onyx stones and engrave on them the names of the sons of Israel, 10 six of their names on the one stone and the names of the remaining six on the other stone, according to their birth. 11 As a jeweler engraves a signet, you shall engrave the two stones according to the names of the sons of Israel; you shall set them in filigree settings of gold. 12 You shall put the two stones on the shoulder pieces of the ephod, as stones of memorial for the sons of Israel, and Aaron shall bear their names before the Lord on his two shoulders for a memorial. 13 You shall make filigree settings of gold, 14 and two chains of pure gold; you shall make them of twisted cordage work, and you shall put the corded chains on the filigree settings.” (NASB95)

“Ephod” is the noun ʾē·p̄ōḏ (ֵאֹפד) (ay-fode´), which refers to a garment like that of a vest or a coat over one’s robe, which the high priest was to wear in the tabernacle when serving. It was the distinguishing mark of the high priest Aaron.

3 Stuart, D. K. (2007). Vol. 2: Exodus (electronic ed.). Logos Library System; The New American Commentary. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers. 4 Biblical Studies Press. (2006; 2006). The NET Bible First Edition Notes (Ex 28:2). Biblical Studies Press.


8

The New Bible Commentary-Revised describes this garment as, “a short linen garment of the same material as the veil of the Tabernacle, joined at the shoulder, and the two open sides bound together by an embroidered girdle.” (page 135)

Exodus 28:4-5 tell the reader that the material used to make this garment of the high priest was gold, blue, purple and scarlet yarn and fine linen.

Eerdman’s Bible Dictionary has the following comment regarding the ephod and describe it as “An article of clothing worn primarily by the Israelite high priest; elsewhere it appears to be an image or some such solid object as well as an object used in divination. According to Exod. 28:5ff. (cf. 39:2ff.) the ephod worn by the high priest consisted of a sleeveless garment of fine twined lined decorated with gold and blue, purple, and scarlet material, to which two shoulder pieces were attached and around which fitted a belt. To the shoulder pieces were affixed two onyx stones engraved with the names of the twelve tribes in order of their inception, which served as a permanent memorial before God. At the front of the garment, possibly in an open spot, hung the breastpiece of twelve precious stones symbolizing the twelve tribes. Although it was usually the high priest and the priests who wore the ephod (e.g., Exod. 28:4; 29:5), young Samuel, while ministering at Shiloh (1 Sam. 2:18), wore a linen ephod (Heb. ˒ēp̱ōḏ baḏ), as did King David during the festive ceremony which accompanied the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam. 6:14; cf. 1 Chr. 15:27). Some scholars discern two types of ephod, with the linen ephod a brief garment such as a loincloth or an apron worn over a longer robe (cf. 1 Chr. 15:27). But, given that the priestly ephod was made of fine linen and that the ephod worn by the priests of Nob was a linen garment (1 Sam. 22:18; see LXX A), they may have been identical. Three Old Testament passages imply that the ephod was an idol rather than a garment: Judg. 8:27, the ephod made by Gideon at Ophrah to which the Israelites pledged their religious fidelity; 17:5, the ephod fashioned by Micah, alongside the teraphim (cf. 18:14, 17–18 which list four kinds of idols); and Hos. 3:4, where again the ephod is mentioned with the teraphim. Potential similarities have been noted between the Hebrew ephod (possibly a pullover) and the overgarment (Gk. ependýtēs) fashioned on the small statues of various ancient Near Eastern deities (cf. 2 Kgs. 23:7; Isa. 30:22); the Hebrews may have patterned this ephod after such foreign vestments, though making the opening in the front rather than in the back. The ephod is at times clearly linked with eliciting an oracle from God: by Saul’s priest Ahijah at the battle of Michmash pass (1 Sam. 14:3; LXX also vv. 18–19, where the MT reads “ark”), by Saul following that battle (vv. 36–42), by David at Keilah (23:6–12), and again at Ziklag (30:7–8). Most likely the ephod contained a pocket for the Urim and Thummim which were used for divination.”5

5 Myers, A. C. (1987). The Eerdmans Bible dictionary (342). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans.


9

Carol Myers writes that the ephod was “the most prominent of the elaborate Aaronide garments described in the tabernacle texts (Exod. 28; 39), it designates the only article of priestly apparel that plays a significant role outside the priestly writings contained in the Pentateuch. A ‘linen’ ephod appears in stories of Samuel (1 Sam. 2:18; 22:18) and David (2 Sam. 6:14; 1 Chron. 15:27), and an ephod linked with teraphim is found in Judges 17-18 (cf. Hos. 3:4; Isa. 30:22). Not simply a ceremonial garment or a divination device, the ephod can best be understood in relation to the special trappings that adorned cult statues in Mesopotamian or Egyptian temples and that, in Israelite religion as priestly garments or objects, similarly helped bring human beings into contact with the deity.”6

Daniel McGee writes “Priestly garment connected with seeking a word from God and used in a wrong way as an idol. The exact meaning and derivation of the term ‘ephod’ are not clear. In early OT history there are references to the ephod as a rather simple, linen garment, possibly a short skirt, apron, or loincloth. It is identified as a priestly garment (1 Sam. 14:3; 22:18). It was worn by Samuel (1 Sam. 2:18) and by David when he danced before God on the occasion of the transfer of the ark of the covenant to David’s capital city of Jerusalem (2 Sam. 6:14). From its earliest forms and uses, it appears that the ephod was associated with the presence of God or those who had a special relationship with God. It is portrayed as a source of divine guidance, as when David wanted to know if he should trust the people of Keilah (1 Sam. 23:9–12) or when he wanted to know if he should pursue the Amalekites (1 Sam. 30:7–8). There are references to a special ephod associated with the high priest. It appears to have been an apron-like garment worn over the priest’s robe and under his breastplate. It is described in detail in Exod. 28–35. Woven of gold, blue, purple, and scarlet materials, it was very elaborate and ornate. On top of each of the shoulders the ephod was fastened by two onyx clasps on which were engraved the names of six of the 12 tribes. Twelve gemstones on the breastplate contained the names of the 12 tribes. Some scholars believe that this breastplate also contained a pouch where the sacred lots, Urim and Thummim, were kept (Exod. 28:30). The ephod was fastened around the waist by a beautiful and intricately woven girdle. The robe worn with the ephod was equally elaborate. It was blue in color, with a fringe at the bottom comprised of golden bells and blue, purple, and scarlet pomegranates (Exod. 28:31–34). Apparently, the ephod of the high priest was not only worn by the high priest, but also prominently displayed in the tabernacle. It may have been placed upon a divine image and used as an object of worship at some times in Israel’s history. This usage, plus the importance of the ephod, may have led to idolatrous use in 6 Achtemeier, P. J., Harper & Row, P., & Society of Biblical Literature. (1985). Harper's Bible dictionary (1st ed.) (273). San Francisco: Harper & Row.


10

worship during the time of the judges (Judg. 8:27; 17:5–6). The importance of the ephod in Hebrew worship is seen in the fact that, even after the division of the nation into the Northern and Southern Kingdoms, there is mention of the ephod in worship in the Northern Kingdom (Hos. 3:4).”7 In Exodus 28, the “ephod” referred to a garment or a piece of clothing that covered the body from thigh to shoulder without covering either the arms or legs. It was typically worn by priests or temple servants (e.g. 1 Samuel 2:18; 22:18). The ephod worn by Aaron was a very elaborate and impressive sort of ceremonial vest or coat worn over his other garments. Symbolically, it signified that Aaron was to represent God among the Israelites. It became a symbol of God’s presence among the Israelites. This chapter distinguishes the ephod from the breastpiece, which was attached to it for the purpose of discerning God’s will through the Urim and Thummin. The term “ephod” eventually referred to both articles in the sense of the breastpiece attached to the ephod since they were not used separately but always together. The books in the Old Testament that come after Exodus use the term “ephod” on a consistent basis to refer to both articles of clothing. The ephod was made of the same fabric and colors as the rest of Aaron’s garments as well as the inner curtains of the tabernacle itself. Exodus 28:6 tell the reader that it was to be made by a skilled craftsman which would thus make it a high-quality garment. The two shoulder pieces mentioned in Exodus 28:7 were either loops or straps that permitted the front and the back of the garment to be tied together once the ephod was placed on the high priest. The ephod was to be secured around Aaron’s waist according to Exodus 28:8 since the phrase “woven band” actually refers to a woven waistband which the NET Bible brings out in its translation of the verse. A special, elaborate “waistband” was to be attached to the ephod and was to be of the same fabric and color as the rest of the ephod. This “waistband” would be tied around Aaron, the high priest much like the waistband of a bathrobe or waistband that ties at the front of a jacket or vest. In Exodus 28:9-10, we have the Lord telling Moses that two onyx stones were to have the names of the sons of Israel engraved on them with six of the names on one stone and the other remaining six on the second stone according to the order of their birth. Onyx was a type of quartz with varicolored bands and was imported in biblical times as a precious stone comparable in value to gold and sapphire (Genesis 2:12; Job 28:16). The variously colored bands of onyx make it an excellent material for carving in the sense that a skilled engraver can carve the stone so that the 7 Brand, C., Draper, C., England, A., Bond, S., Clendenen, E. R., Butler, T. C., & Latta, B. (2003). Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary (499). Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers.


11

engraving is in a completely different color than the background, which would make it a highly suitable material for signets and seals. Genesis 29:31-30:24 along with Genesis 35:16-18 contain the record of the birth of Jacob’s children who would later become the progenitors of the twelve tribes of Israel, from whom the Messiah Jesus Christ in His human nature would descend. This passage indicates Leah bore Jacob Reuben, the firstborn son (Genesis 29:32). Then she bore the patriarch Simeon (Genesis 29:33). She bore him Levi after Simeon (Genesis 29:34). Judah was the fourth child born to Leah and Jacob (Genesis 29:35). Rachel gave Jacob her maid Bilhah because she could not bear children for Jacob and gave birth to Dan (Genesis 30:5). Bilhad bore Jacob another son named Naphtali (Genesis 30:7). Then Leah gave Jacob her maid Zilpah who bore the patriarch another son who was named Gad who was followed by Asher (Genesis 30:9). Following these births, Leah conceived again and bore Jacob a son who they named Issachar (Genesis 30:17-18). She conceived again and bore the patriarch Zebulun (Genesis 30:19). The next son to be born was through Rachel, her firstborn and he was named Joseph (Genesis 30:24). The last son born to Jacob was through Rachel who died while giving birth to Benjamin (Genesis 35:16-18). The accounts in Genesis 29-30 and Genesis 35 are organized in such a way as to suggest the order of birth of Jacob’s sons. Therefore, from these two accounts, the names engraved on the onyx stones of the ephod of the high priest starting on the right shoulder and continuing in order would have been Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Dan and Naphtali. The left shoulder would have had the names of Gad, Asher, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph and Benjamin. The significance of the birth order only suggested that just as Jacob’s sons were born in order to him whose descendants became the house of Israel, so the high priest represented the entire family of Israel in God’s presence as symbolized by the ephod shoulder stones. Exodus 28:11-14 tells the reader that the onyx stones were to be carefully engraved with the names of the sons of Israel cut deeply and permanently in the stones, which were to be mounted in filigree or fancy gold settings that would enhance their dignity. The stones were to be fastened permanently to the shoulders of the ephod by braided gold chains. This was to be worn by Aaron whenever he ministered in the presence of the Lord in the tabernacle. This was to remind the Israelites that Aaron represented not only himself but the entire house of Israel. It was to emphasize that everyone in Israel was important to the Lord with no exceptions. These onyx stones would hang by their special gold chains and would of course swing as Aaron moved, which would be a visible reminder of the Israelites corporate solidarity with Aaron before the Lord.


12

Exodus 28:15-30: The Breastpiece

Exodus 28:15 “You shall make a breastpiece of judgment, the work of a skillful workman; like the work of the ephod you shall make it: of gold, of blue and purple and scarlet material and fine twisted linen you shall make it. 16 It shall be square and folded double, a span (nine inches) in length and a span (9 inches) in width. 17 You shall mount on it four rows of stones; the first row shall be a row of ruby, topaz and emerald; 18 and the second row a turquoise, a sapphire and a diamond; 19 and the third row a jacinth, an agate and an amethyst; 20 and the fourth row a beryl and an onyx and a jasper; they shall be set in gold filigree. 21 The stones shall be according to the names of the sons of Israel: twelve, according to their names; they shall be like the engravings of a seal, each according to his name for the twelve tribes. 22 You shall make on the breastpiece chains of twisted cordage work in pure gold. 23 You shall make on the breastpiece two rings of gold, and shall put the two rings on the two ends of the breastpiece. 24 You shall put the two cords of gold on the two rings at the ends of the breastpiece. 25 You shall put the other two ends of the two cords on the two filigree settings, and put them on the shoulder pieces of the ephod, at the front of it. 26 You shall make two rings of gold and shall place them on the two ends of the breastpiece, on the edge of it, which is toward the inner side of the ephod. 27 You shall make two rings of gold and put them on the bottom of the two shoulder pieces of the ephod, on the front of it close to the place where it is joined, above the skillfully woven band of the ephod. 28 They shall bind the breastpiece by its rings to the rings of the ephod with a blue cord, so that it will be on the skillfully woven band of the ephod, and that the breastpiece will not come loose from the ephod. 29 Aaron shall carry the names of the sons of Israel in the breastpiece of judgment over his heart when he enters the holy place, for a memorial before the Lord continually. 30 You shall put in the breastpiece of judgment the Urim and the Thummim, and they shall be over Aaron’s heart when he goes in before the Lord; and Aaron shall carry the judgment of the sons of Israel over his heart before the Lord continually.” (NASB95) The breastpiece was a square pouch, which was used for divination. It was eighteen inches square and was basically a fancy pocket worn over the high priest’s chest as part of the ephod that held the stones used for discerning the will of God. “Breastpiece of judgment” is composed of the masculine singular construct form of the noun ḥō·šěn (ֹחֶׁשן) (kho´-shen), “judgment” and the masculine singular noun miš·pāṭ (ִמְׁשָּפט) (mish-pawt´), “judgment.”


13

The noun ḥō·šěn means “breast-plate” which is an ornamental chest covering worn by the high priest in Israel, which held the Urim and Thummim.

Commenting on this word, Charles Feinberg writes that “It was a square pouch a span (about three inches) on a side, with gold rings at the corners. On it were twelve gems on which were engraved the names of the tribes of Israel. Gold cords fastened the upper rings to the gems on the shoulders of the ephod. The breastplate symbolized the unity of the nation, the dependence of the people on the person and ministry of the high priest, their presence before God as a beloved people, and the channel of the revelation of God’s will. With it were the Urim and Thummim whereby the will of God was conveyed to the people (Ex 28:15–30). The LXX designates it as the “oracle of judgment” for “breastplate of judgment” or “breastplate of the (oracular) decision,” in Hebrew. It was considered the most important item among the distinctive garments of the high priest. Josephus’s account of the breastplate is elaborate, but not entirely reliable (Antiquities of the Jews 3.7.5).”8

The noun miš·pāṭ means “judgment” or “decision” in the sense of an official proclamation concerning the will of God. Exodus 28:18 teaches that this “breastpiece of judgment” literally means “a breastpiece for use in making decisions.” (see NET) Thus this breastpiece was used for making decisions or for determining the will of God in a particular matter or circumstance.

The breastpiece was made of the same material and colors as the ephod according to Exodus 28:15. The colors of the breastpiece were blue, purple, scarlet and was made of gold according to this verse, which corresponds to the gold and the colors that composed the inner part of the tabernacle. Also, this verse reveals that the breastpiece had to be made by an artistic designer or skilled craftsman. This all emphasizes the fact that the tabernacle and the priesthood, which officiated in the tabernacle worship were integrated so as to represent the Lord to the Israelites and vice versa. The breastpiece was to be square and when doubled it was nine inches long and nine inches wide according to Exodus 28:16.

Douglas Stuart commenting on verse 16 writes “This description of the dimensions of the breastpiece could be misunderstood as suggesting that it started as a square eighteen by eighteen inches (“a span long and a span wide”), which was then folded over into a rectangle (“folded double”) measuring eighteen by nine inches. More probably, the final dimension after folding is intended, so that the cloth before being sewn into a big pocket/pouch was actually thirty-six inches by eighteen inches (two spans by one span) in addition to the gold chains that attached it to the ephod proper (see below). Although we do not know Aaron’s size and 8 Feinberg, C. L. (1999). 772 חׁשן. In R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer, Jr. & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer, Jr. & B. K. Waltke, Ed.) (electronic ed.) (332). Chicago: Moody Press.


14

weight, the fact that the average adult male Israelite of that time was about five feet two inches tall and weighed about one hundred and thirty pounds suggests that the average high priest would have this breastpiece stretched over his full chest—from under his armpits to his waist and from the middle of one side to the middle of the other side of his torso—covering his whole chest and belly area. In other words, the breastpiece was not merely a patch on his ephod but a square frontal vest, a very prominent, central, expansive, symbolic display of the covenant relation of God to his people.”9 Exodus 28:17-21 teaches that the twelve stones were arranged three to a row in a total of four rows. This is comparable to the ephod shoulder stones. John Durham writes “The specific varieties of gemstones employed can only be surmised, as we cannot translate the terms employed for them with any certainty. Garber and Funk (IDB 2:900–904) have a thorough treatment of gemstones known to be available in the OT period (cf. also Frerichs, “Edelsteine,” BHH 1, cols. 362–64), and Lucas (Egyptian Materials, 442–61) presents a detailed account of the precious and semiprecious stones used in ancient Egypt from the First Dynasty forward. The difficulty is that we cannot with any accuracy translate the Hebrew terms for the stones used in the Breastpiece; thus we cannot establish the color patterns, and indeed we can only guess that each stone was a different color since each one has a different name. The rabbinic commentators worked out elaborate symbolic color schemes, sometimes linked to the signs of the Zodiac (Goodenough, By Light, 99–100; Garber and Funk, 904–5), and it is upon this tradition that the colors of Chagall’s magnificent Jerusalem Windows for the Hadassah Hospital synagogue are based (Chagall and Leymarie, xiv–xvi).”10

“Ruby” is the noun ʾō·ḏěm (o´-dem), which refers to some type of reddish stone since the root of this word is associated with “redness.” Thus, the NET, NIV and NASB render the word “ruby,” which is a precious stone that is a red corundum. “Topaz” is the noun piṭ·ḏā(h) (pit-daw´), which the Septuagint and Vulgate identify as topaz, which was a yellow to brownish-yellow transparent mineral used as a gem. “Emerald” is the noun bā·rě·qěṯ (baw-reh´-keth), which literally means “flashing” or “sparkling.” The KJV and ESV render the word “carbuncle” whereas the NET and NIV render it “beryl.” The Septuagint translates it with the noun σμάραγδος, which means “emerald,” which was a rich green variety of beryl. Thus, either “emerald” or “beryl” is a good translation for the word since emerald was a form of beryl.

9 Stuart, D. K. (2007). Vol. 2: Exodus (electronic ed.). Logos Library System; The New American Commentary (610). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers. 10 Durham, J. I. (2002). Vol. 3: Word Biblical Commentary : Exodus. Word Biblical Commentary (387). Dallas: Word, Incorporated.


15

“Turquoise” is the noun np̄ěḵˊ (no´-fek), which the NIV and NET render “turquoise” which is a light greenish blue whereas the ESV translates it “emerald.” The former is more likely the color of this gemstone since the noun bā·rě·qěṯ (baw-reh´-keth) speaks of a beryl or emerald stone. “Sapphire” is the noun sǎp·pîr (sap-peer´), which denotes a clear blue lapis lazuli rather than a very hard modern sapphire (see TNIV). It owes its name to the Sanskrit çanipriya. That the word denotes a lapis lazuli, the rich, azure gem so common to the ancient world is based upon a comparison between the Ugaritic parallels ṭhr (gem)/iqnim (lapis lazuli) and the biblical pair ṭāhōr, ṭōhar/sappîr.11 “Diamond” is the noun yā·hǎlōm (yah-hal-ome´), which refers to either a very hard stone or one that was mined and could be either a diamond or a jasper. “Jacinth” is the noun lě·šěm (leh´-shem), which the NET, NIV, NASB and ESV all translate as “jacinth.” Various studies concerning this word which only occurs here in Exodus 28:19, do not agree as to the color of this stone, thus making a certain identification impossible. “Agate” is the noun šeḇô (sheb-oo´), which the NET, NIV, and ESV render as “agate,” which was a variety of chalcedony with colored bands. “Amethyst” is the noun ʾǎḥ·lā·mā(h) (akh-law´-maw), which the NET, NIV, and ESV translate as “amethyst,” which was a clear purple or bluish-violet variety of crystallized quartz. “Beryl” is the noun tǎr·šîš (tar-sheesh´), which the NET and NIV translate as “chrysolite.” This noun is identified with the Spanish topaz. Spanish gold topaz was chrysolite to the ancients. The Septuagint employs the Greek noun χρυσόλιθος to translate it, which means “chrysolite,” which was golden yellow in color. “Onyx” is the noun šō·hǎm (sho´-ham), which is also translated “onyx” by the ESV, NIV and NET. The word’s significance is clear through Akkadian cognates with the meaning “red,” thus some render the word “carnelian,” which was a hard red chalcedony.

Willem VanGemeren commenting on this word writes “The JB, NIV, and NRSV (with the exception of Ezek 28:13) translate this word as ‘onyx.’ The NEB renders ֹׁשַהם “cornelian,” the reading preferred by Zimmerli (83). Pope (Job, AB 15, 1980, 204) admits that the identity of this precious stone is conjectural. The NIV follows the LXX, which reads ‘onyx’ for ֹׁשַהם (cf. Syr. beryl). In view of the Akk. cognate and those OT texts that mention ֹׁשַהם with lapis lazuli (e.g., Job 28:16; Ezek 28:13), carnelian seems the more likely identity of the gemstone in question (cf. Allen, Ezekiel 20–48, WBC 29, 1990, 90–91).”12

11 Patterson, R. D. (1999). 1535 ַסִּפיר. In R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer, Jr. & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer, Jr. & B. K. Waltke, Ed.) (electronic ed.) (631). Chicago: Moody Press. 12 VanGemeren, W. (1998). Vol. 4: New international dictionary of Old Testament theology & exegesis (52). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.


16

“Jasper” is the noun yā·šep̄ē(h) (yaw-shef-ay´), which is correctly translated referring to an opaque cryptocrystalline quartz of any of several colors especially green chalcedony.

The English translations differ in their identification of these gemstones. NET NIV NASB ESV Verse 17 Ruby, topaz,

beryl Ruby, topaz, beryl

Ruby, topaz, emerald

Sardius, topaz, carbuncle

Verse 18 Turquoise, sapphire, emerald

Turquoise, sapphire, emerald

Turquoise, sapphire, diamond

Emerald, sapphire, diamond

Verse 19 Jacinth, agate, amethyst

Jacinth, agate, amethyst



Verse 20 Chrysolite, onyx, jasper

Chrysolite, onyx, jasper

Beryl, onyx, jasper

Beryl, onyx, jasper

Exodus 28:21 teaches that the various stones mentioned in verses 17-20 were to

represent each of the twelve tribes of Israel. This breastpiece was yet another place where another representation of the twelve tribes of Israel could be worn by the high priest while he served in the presence of the Lord. If you recall, two onyx shoulder stones of the ephod held the names of the twelve tribes of Israel engraved on it with the name of a single tribe engraved on a single stone. Therefore, the twelve tribes of Israel were represented both as groups and individually on both the shoulder stones of the ephod and the breastpiece. Interestingly, nine of these twelve stones that are on the ephod and breastpiece of the high priest in Israel are found in Ezekiel 28:13, which describes that which Satan wore in eternity past in the Garden of Eden. He was adorned with nine jewels according to Ezekiel 28:13, which are comparable to the twelve jewels found on the breastplate of the high priest of Israel, where each jewel represented one of the twelve tribes liable for military service (Exodus 28:15-21). Satan in eternity past before his rebellion was the high priest of God ruling over these nine divisions or tribes of angels just as the high priest in Israel presided over the twelve tribes of Israel (Ezekiel 28:14). Revelation 12:4 says that one-third of the angels fell, that means three angelic divisions in the Lord’s military rebelled. These three angelic divisions are arranged in rank, thus mimicking God.

In the Exodus context, each of the stones represented one of the twelve tribes of Israel and bore its name inscribed on the gem. Exodus 28:29 states that Aaron (i.e., the high priest) shall wear the breastplate with the stones inscribed with the twelve tribes “over his heart” whenever he enters the Holy Place “as a continual


17

memorial before the Lord.” The verse also calls the breastplate so equipped “the breastplate of judgment.”

Each of Israel’s tribes is thus a precious jewel in God’s sight, and was represented before Him in this fashion whenever the high priest entered into the presence of God. Furthermore, the breastplate also served the practical function of acting as a means of communication from the Lord in designating specific tribes for specific tasks. What we see in Ezekiel’s representation of a very similar apparatus on Satan, therefore, should be seen as fulfilling a similar function. Exodus 28:22-28 makes clear that the breastpiece was a separate item from the ephod and was not sewn to it but attached by gold chains at the shoulders and gold rings at the waist. It was to be attached in order to keep it from swinging.

Hannah writes “The breastpiece was attached snugly over the ephod by four gold chains. Two of the chains were slipped through gold rings at the upper corners of the breastpiece and attached to the ephod’s shoulder pieces. The other two gold chains were slipped through gold rings at the lower corners of the breastpiece and attached to the side seams of the ephod and tied … with a blue cord … to the waistband.”13 Exodus 28:29-30 tell the reader two specific purposes for the breastpiece, namely representation and divination. The former meant that the high priest would represent the twelve tribes of Israel when he served in the tabernacle. The latter was related to the Urim and Thummim, which was used to determine the will of God.

The Urim and Thummim meant “lights” and “perfections” respectively and are mentioned in Numbers 27:21, 1 Samuel 30:7-8, Ezra 2:63, and Nehemiah 8:65. They were two objects that were used by the Israelites to determine the will of God. They were to be placed in the breastpiece of decision and were to be over the heart of the high priest when he served in the tabernacle in the presence of the Lord. The Urim and Thummim were simply colored stones employed by the Israelites at certain times as devices of divination and possessed no intrinsic powers. They were used to determine the will of God with regards to the nation of Israel rather than for guidance for individuals.

Commenting on their use Hannah writes “How they were used in determining God’s will is unknown, but some suggest the Urim represented a negative answer and the Thummim a positive answer. Perhaps this view is indicated by the fact that Urim (’ûrîm) begins with the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet, and Thummim (tūmmîm) with the last letter. Others suggest that the objects simply symbolized the high priest’s authority to inquire of God, or the assurance that the priest would

13 Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary. (1983-). The Bible knowledge commentary : An exposition of the scriptures (Ex 28:22–28). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.


18

receive enlightenment (‘lights’) and perfect knowledge (‘perfections’) from God.”14

The Oxford Dictionary of the Church has the following comment, they write “Prob. originally ‘lots’, used in early Heb. divination to interpret the will of God to the people. There are several refs. in the OT, and from the *Septuagintal text of 1 Sam. 14:41 it would seem that the lots were cast so as to yield a negative or affirmative answer to the question posed. Their nature is not stated; but the Arabic custom of divination by headless arrows (cf. Ezek. 21:21 f.), with the alternatives written on them, may indicate the procedure followed. Their divinatory use is nowhere mentioned after the time of *Solomon, perhaps because it was replaced by the living voice of the Prophets, who disapproved of all mechanical oracles (cf. Hos. 4:12), and Ez. 2:63 and Neh. 7:65 expressly suggest that such divination had ceased in post-exilic times. The inclusion of Urim and Thummim in the breastplate worn by the *High Priest in later times (cf. Exod. 28:30, Lev. 8:8) was prob. a traditional survival (note the association of ‘Thummim and Urim’ with Levi in Deut. 33:8). They were numbered by the Rabbis among the five things no longer possessed by the Second Temple. By the time of *Josephus they were so little understood as to be confused with the breastplate itself (Ant. 3. 214–18). Etymologically the meaning of the words, which was unknown to the ancient translators of the Bible, is obscure; LXX has δήλωσις and ἀλήθεια, Vulg. doctrina and veritas. In RV marg. they are rendered ‘the Lights and the Perfections’. It has been suggested (G. R. *Driver) that ‘Urim’ is to be connected with a word meaning ‘to give oracular response’.”15

The NET Bible has the following comment with regards to the Urim and Thummim, stating that they “were two objects intended for determining the divine will. There is no clear evidence of their size or shape or the material of which they were made, but they seem to have been familiar items to Moses and the people. The best example of their use comes from 1 Sam 14:36–42. Some have suggested from the etymologies that they were light and dark objects respectively, perhaps stones or sticks or some other object. They seem to have fallen out of use after the Davidic period when the prophetic oracles became popular. It may be that the title ‘breastpiece of judgment’ indicates that these objects were used for making ‘decisions’ (J. P. Hyatt, Exodus [NCBC], 283–84). U. Cassuto has the most thorough treatment of the subject (Exodus, 378–82); he lists several very clear rules for their uses gathered from their instances in the Bible, including that they were a form of sacred lot, that priests or leaders of the people only could use them,

14 Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary. (1983-). The Bible knowledge commentary : An exposition of the scriptures (Ex 28:29–30). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books. 15 Cross, F. L., & Livingstone, E. A. (2005). The Oxford dictionary of the Christian Church (3rd ed. rev.) (1682). Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.


19

and that they were used for discovering the divine will in areas that were beyond human knowledge.”16

Albert Bean writes “Objects Israel, and especially the high priest, used to determine God’s will. Little is known about the Urim and Thummim. They are first mentioned in Exodus as being kept by the high priest in a ‘breastplate of judgment’ (Exod. 28:15–30). Later on, Moses gave the tribe of Levi special responsibility for their care (Deut. 33:8). After Aaron’s and Moses’ death, Eleazar was to carry and to use the lots to inquire of the Lord (Num. 27:18–23). They apparently were two objects that served as sacred lots. That is, they were used to determine God’s will or to receive a divine answer to a question. Saul called for their use, for instance, in determining who had broken Saul’s vow in a battle with the Philistines (1 Sam. 14:41–45). This text also hints as to how the objects were used. They were ‘given,’ perhaps drawn or shaken, from a bag. One object gave one answer. The other lot gave another answer. Probably, whichever lot came out first, that was understood to be God’s answer. The Urim and Thummim were not, however, automatic or mechanical. God could refuse to answer. Saul sought the spirit of Samuel through a witch because God would not answer Saul through the Urim or dreams or prophets (1 Sam. 28:6–25). The ultimate fate of the Urim and Thummim is unknown. In Nehemiah’s time expectation continued that someday a priest would arise with the Urim and Thummim (Ezra 2:63; Neh. 7:65). This probably refers to the ability to receive an answer from the Lord, however, rather than a return of the lots given to Aaron.”17

Durham writes “That the Urim and the Thummim were an oracular device of some sort is established by the few OT references to their function (cf. Num 27:21; Deut 33:8; 1 Sam 28:6; Ezra 2:63; Neh 7:65; and LXX 1 Sam 14:41). What sort of device they were, and how the message of Yahweh contained in them was understood, we have no hint in the OT. A variety of suggestions has been made, all of them largely guesswork: two stones, each of a different color (Lipiński, VT 20 [1970] 495–96); small objects made of metal or gemstones, engraved with symbols (Mendelsohn, “Urim and Thummim,” IDB 4:740); small pebbles or dice or “little sticks” (de Vaux, Ancient Israel, 352); flat stones, each with an ‘auspicious’ and an ‘inauspicious’ side (Rowley, Worship, 67). Robertson (VT 14 [1964] 71–72) has even suggested the twenty-two letters of the alphabet ‘inscribed or engraved’ on ‘discs or tablets of wood or metal,’ serving both as symbols of writing, a gift of God, and as arithmetical, odd-even symbols, א equalling ‘one’ and suggesting אור ‘light,’ and ת equalling ‘twenty-two’ and suggesting תם ‘end’; אורים ‘Urim’ would thus represent the odd-number letters, תמים ‘Thummim’ the even-number letters,

16 Biblical Studies Press. (2006; 2006). The NET Bible First Edition Notes (Ex 28:30). Biblical Studies Press. 17 Brand, C., Draper, C., England, A., Bond, S., Clendenen, E. R., Butler, T. C., & Latta, B. (2003). Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary (1643). Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers.


20

and any three letters might suggest a verb root. The practice of oracle-seeking by a variety of means, including the use of positive and negative stones, is widely attested in the ANE (cf. Reiner, JNES 19 [1960] 24–31), and the Urim and Thummim are without doubt an Israelite version of such practices. Just what they were and how they worked, however, we cannot say without more data.”18

Eerdman’s Bible Dictionary “Objects used by the priests for deternining the will of God. No description of the Urim and Thummim is provided, although it may be assumed that they were small objects because they fit into a pouch on the breastpiece worn on the ephod of the high priest (Exod. 28:29–30; Lev. 8:8; cf. Exod. 29:5). They may have been pebbles or sticks, or made from a precious metal. The terms may be of foreign derivation. It has been proposed that Urim may mean ‘light’ and Thummim ‘dark,’ and that thus one was light-colored and indicated God’s will in one direction while the other was dark-colored and gave the opposite side. Another possibility is that the terms indicate the beginning and ending of the Hebrew alphabet (aleph and tau); thus twenty-two letters would have been cast out and read, on the order of a Ouija board. The technique may have been to shake the pouch on the breastplate and then withdraw one of the objects; however, some scholars think that the objects were cast like lots. Most biblical examples of usage imply a direct question and answer procedure (1 Sam. 23:9–12; 30:7–8). Answers either confirm or negate the question. Saul views the prospective answer as ‘right’ (1 Sam. 14:41), whatever its outcome. Negative answers seem possible, although biblical passages do not explain the procedure clearly. God does not seem to answer at all when a negative response occurs (1 Sam. 14:36–37; 28:6). The Talmud (Soṭah 48a) observes that the usage of Urim and Thummim was lost during the Second Temple period. Ezra 2:63; Neh. 7:65 suggest that discernment by means of Urim and Thummim may have been still possible though rare.”19

J.A. Moyter writes “In association with the office of high priest, God made a provision for giving guidance to his people (Dt. 33:8, 10) but particularly to the leaders of his people (Nu. 27:21, cf. below). Almost everything, however, about this provision remains unexplained. The words Urim and Thummim have received no satisfactory etymology and the technique whereby guidance was made plain has not been recorded. A further mystery is the apparent disappearance of the Urim and Thummim from national life between the early monarchy (e.g. 1 Sa. 23:6) and some revival of the usage envisaged in Ezr. 2:63; Ne. 7:65. Three passages are of particular interest. Abiathar came to David (1 Sa. 23:6) with the ‘ephod’. It is reasonable to assume that this was the high-priestly ephod, not the ordinary ephod of priestly wear (1 Sa. 22:18), for otherwise why should it be mentioned? In the 18 Durham, J. I. (2002). Vol. 3: Word Biblical Commentary : Exodus. Word Biblical Commentary (387–388). Dallas: Word, Incorporated. 19 Myers, A. C. (1987). The Eerdmans Bible dictionary (1032). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans.


21

light of the remainder of the story we must assume that ‘ephod’ here acts as a comprehensive term for that whole unit of high-priestly garb: ephod-breastpiece-Urim (cf. Ex. 28:28–30; see 1 Sa. 14:18, where ‘ark’ (lxx reads ‘ephod’] seems similarly to summarize the oracular equipment of the priest). David (1 Sa. 23:9-12) asks direct questions and elicits affirmative answers. In point of fact no examples of negative answers are anywhere recorded. The second passage is 1 Sa. 14 and it presents similarities: cf. 14:3, 41 with 23:6, 9; note the identical title in 14:41; 23:10 (a customary formula?). According to MT Saul requests: ‘Give perfect things’ (tāmîm, related, presumably, to Thummim). rsv accepts the reconstruction of the text here, helped by lxx, and reads ‘If this guilt is in me or in Jonathan … give Urim … if this guilt is in thy people … give Thummim.’ The third passage shows that the Urim and Thummim could not be compelled to give an answer: 1 Sa. 28:6; cf. 14:36–37. It is extremely difficult if not impossible to offer a coherent suggestion on the basis of this evidence. H. H. Rowley conjectures that Urim (related to ’ārar, to curse) gives the negative answer and Thummim (related to tāmam, to be perfect) gives the affirmative. On the assumption that the Urim and Thummim were two flat objects each with a ‘yes’ side and each with a ‘no’ side, then on being taken or tossed out of the pouch (cf. Pr. 16:33) a ‘yes’ (two Thummim) and ‘no’ (two Urim) and a ‘no reply’ (one Urim and one Thummim) were all possible. This is intriguing and plausible but, of course, must rest in part on the reconstruction of 1 Sa. 14:41 and ignore the lack of evidence for negative replies.”20

The IVP Bible Background Commentary writes “Unlike most of the other objects in this passage, there is no mention of ‘making’ the Urim and Thummim. This suggests that they were already in use prior to this time and now were to be housed in the breastpiece and used by the high priest (see Lev 8:8 and Deut 33:8). No description of these objects is found in Scripture, although traditions from the Hellenistic and later periods suggest they were markers whose appearance and presentation when cast like lots would determine God’s will (see Num 27:21; 1 Sam 14:37–41 and 28:6). There is no negative character attached to the Urim and Thummim as there are to other divinatory practices, and they are never mentioned in passages describing non-Israelite worship or ritual. Nevertheless the practice of posing yes-no questions to the gods (asking oracles) is known throughout the ancient Near East. Particularly of interest are the Babylonian tamitu texts, which preserve the answers to many oracular questions. Positive and negative stones (thought to be bright stones and dark stones) were also used widely in Mesopotamia in a procedure called psephomancy. In one Assyrian text alabaster and hematite are specifically mentioned. The yes-no question would be posed and 20 Wood, D. R. W., & Marshall, I. H. (1996). New Bible dictionary (3rd ed.) (1219–1220). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press.


22

then a stone drawn out. The same color stone would have to be drawn out three times consecutively for the answer to be confirmed. Urim is the Hebrew word for ‘lights’ and therefore would logically be associated with bright or white stones. One recent study has pointed out that hematite, because of its use for weights and seals, was termed the ‘truth stone’ in Sumerian. The Hebrew word Thummim could have a similar meaning.”21

Douglas Stuart has an excellent comment, he writes “As regards divination (seeking the will of God by some sort of physical action), the breastpiece’s pocket was the holding place for the divination stones, the Urim and Thummim (“lights” and “darks”). How were these used? There are three strong possibilities: (1) A number of light and dark stones were contained in the pouch. When, in faith and with prayer, the high priest asked God questions, he would then pull out stones one by one to give answers, a light stone perhaps indicating yes and a dark one indicating no (or vice versa). (2) Only two large stones were in the pouch. Each time the high priest had a question for God on behalf of the people, he reached in and found one. Its color told him, as above, the answer. Then he replaced the stone and reached again for a new answer. This seems unlikely since it would have been all too easy for the priest to have a fairly good sense of which of the two stones was where in the pouch. (3) Two or more stones were in the pouch, shaped something like dice, with alternating sides or faces colored light and dark. These were pulled from the pouch, ‘thrown’ as dice are thrown, and examined to see which colors came ‘up.’ We have no indication from biblical material that allows us to sort among these options and understand what the Urim and Thummim looked like and how they actually were employed physically. What we do know is that God sometimes chose to reveal his will in this manner rather than by speaking directly to the people. No less an important decision than the choosing of a replacement for Judas for the inner core of the church’s apostolic witness was reached in a similar manner in the New Covenant (Acts 1:26), suggesting that God may honor a nonverbal means of choice or discernment of his will from among options or in response to questions posed. It should be obvious to the reader of the Pentateuch and the Bible in general, however, that God did not and does not normally use ‘divination’ methods as his primary mode of revelation. The term ‘over his heart’ is used twice in these verses (once in the form “over Aaron’s heart”)—referring in turn to the position of the names of the Israelite tribes as well as to the Urim and Thummim stones used to discern the will of God. The Bible does not teach that the heart was the center of the emotions or of the spirit or of the mind, but all these concepts were alive and well in the culture in which the Bible was revealed and were part of the idiomatic language and conceptual framework 21 Matthews, V. H., Chavalas, M. W., & Walton, J. H. (2000). The IVP Bible background commentary : Old Testament (electronic ed.) (Ex 28:30–35). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.


23

reflected in the Bible’s language (much like the expressions “learn it by heart” or “I haven’t the heart for …” in today’s English). Accordingly, having the breastpiece and its contents ‘over Aaron’s heart’ helped Israelites understand the value of these objects and the corresponding value to God of his covenant people and of his desire to reveal himself to them. Theologically, the Urim and Thummim represented something on the order of last resort appeals to God for guidance—not individual guidance but national guidance on matters that would require the agreement and concerted effort of the whole people. The people’s first resort was supposed to be obedience to the written covenant since the written covenant constituted the most basic or foundational guidance, generally and perpetually applicable, that they possessed. The second resort would be to listen for direct divine guidance through the word of God from a prophet, something that God occasionally, but not necessarily regularly, gave them. The third resort would be prayer, and Urim and Thummim use fall under this category. With prayer, seeking to understand how best to take a national direction of some sort, the Urim and Thummim would be drawn from the breastpiece pouch and examined for God’s answer to the people’s prayer. It may be assumed that they understood or should have understood that if they had faithfully tried the first two resorts and received no word from the Lord, they might in faith try the third resort, not as a matter of right but as allowed by and guided by an orthodox high priest ministering properly ‘before the Lord.’ It may also be assumed that since the Israelites were drawn more often to heterodoxy than orthodoxy and usually preferred idol worship to keeping Yahweh’s covenant, their use of the Urim and Thummim would most often have failed—and that they and/or the high priest at any given time may not have known the difference, blinded as they were by their disobedience. The Urim and Thummim were mechanical devices of divination that had validity in certain limited contexts and only as God chose to guide the hand of the high priest in response to faithful prayer from an obedient people. In themselves they were simply colored stones that possessed no intrinsic powers.”22 So we can see that we don’t have a lot of information with regards to the Urim and Thummim, only that they were used at certain times to determine the will of God for the nation of Israel. The Holy Spirit has not given us any more details in order to prevent some individual from reproducing them and making the claim that would enable them to receive answers from God regarding certain questions. The Urim and Thummim is no longer needed since every church age believer is indwelt by the Holy Spirit and has the Word of God, which the Holy Spirit has inspired and uses to reveal the Father’s will for us today. 22 Stuart, D. K. (2007). Vol. 2: Exodus (electronic ed.). Logos Library System; The New American Commentary (612–613). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.


24

Exodus 28:31-35: The High Priest’s Robe

Exodus 28:31 “You shall make the robe of the ephod all of blue. 32 There shall be an opening at its top in the middle of it; around its opening there shall be a binding of woven work, like the opening of a coat of mail, so that it will not be torn. 33 You shall make on its hem pomegranates of blue and purple and scarlet material, all around on its hem, and bells of gold between them all around: 34 a golden bell and a pomegranate, a golden bell and a pomegranate, all around on the hem of the robe. 35 It shall be on Aaron when he ministers; and its tinkling shall be heard when he enters and leaves the holy place before the Lord, so that he will not die.” (NASB95)

This passage reveals that the Lord commands Moses to make the robe of the ephod completely blue, which stands in contrast to the multicolored ephod with its multicolored breastpiece. This blue colored robe was to be worn underneath the ephod, which also contained a blue color. This solid colored robe underneath the ephod was to have a round aperture large enough for the high priest to slip over his head. The circle of this hole was to be protected by a sturdy border that would prevent tearing or serious wear as it was put on and taken off during the performance of the high priest’s duties. This robe would have been approximately eight feet long since it had a front and back and would hang to the ankles. All around the hem of the robe, there were to be blue, purple and scarlet pomegranates and bells composed of gold.

Pomegranate fruit were an orange sized, thick skinned, several celled, reddish berried fruit of the Punicaceae family. This fruit was prized in the ancient Near Eastern world. So Moses is being told to make ornamental representations of this fruit all around the hem of the robe that goes underneath the ephod. These pomegranate tassels provided decorative beauty for this blue robe and kept the bells of gold from hitting each other. They represent the fruitfulness of the Lord’s provision for His people.

Patricia Crawford commenting on this fruit writes that it was “a small tree whose bright red fruit resembles an apple. Its hard shiny rind encloses a pulp of fleshy seeds, the juice of which is especially refreshing in a hot environment (Song of Sol. 8:2; Deut. 8:8). The beautiful round fruit was a common decorative motif used on the hems of the robes of the Temple priests (Exod. 28:33-34) and carved into the timbers and beams of Solomon’s Temple (1 Kings 7:18, 20). Extract of the rind was used medicinally and as a red dye, as well as in tanning leather. The pomegranate was regarded as a symbol of fertility and eternal life.”23

23 Achtemeier, P. J., Harper & Row, P., & Society of Biblical Literature. (1985). Harper's Bible dictionary (1st ed.) (807). San Francisco: Harper & Row.


25

Eerdman’s Bible Dictionary commenting on this fruit states that it was “a small

semitropical tree or shrub and its fruit. Although not native to Palestine but to Persia and the surrounding countries, pomegranates were already present in Palestine when the Israelites entered the land (Deut. 8:8). The dissemination of the tree must have begun early, for discoveries made in the pyramids have revealed that it has been cultivated in Egypt since most ancient times. The numerous references to the pomegranate in the Old Testament suggest that it grew throughout Palestine, implied further by the occurrence of Heb. rimmôn in several place names (e.g., Josh. 15:32; 19:45; 21:25). The early blossoming of the pomegranate was one of the signs of the arrival of spring (Cant. 7:12 [MT 13]). It seldom grows to a height of more than 4.5 m. (15 ft.). The leaves are narrow and bright green in color, and the orange-red flowers are somewhat bellshaped. The large red fruit is covered by a thick, leather-like rind. The numerous seeds are the size of grains of wheat and are each surrounded by a juicy red pulp that varies in taste from sweet to somewhat sour. In a country as hot as Palestine, pomegranates offered a delicious source of refreshment, both as a fruit and as a beverage (8:2). The shape of some of the ornaments of the highpriestly garments (Exod. 28:33–34) and of some of the furnishings of the temple (1 Kgs. 7:18, 20, 42; 2 Kgs. 25:17) were inspired by pomegranates. In figurative language the pomegranate indicates physical beauty (Cant. 4:3). The withering of the pomegranate (Joel 1:12) and its restoration (Hag. 2:19) characterize the Exile and restoration.”24

In contrast to the pomegranate tassels on the robe, the gold bells that also were to be all around the hem of the robe had an extremely important function in that they prevented the death of the high priest. These gold bells would tinkle and thus

24 Myers, A. C. (1987). The Eerdmans Bible dictionary (840). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans.


26

allow the Israelites to hear the high priest as he ministered in the holy place. The sound of these bells would assure the Israelites of God’s mercy and grace in allowing the high priest to minister on their behalf in the presence of the Lord. The bells represent joyfulness as we serve the Lord.

Stuart writes “This part of the description implies that the high priest led the other priests into the holy place (the outer room) of the tabernacle in those cases where other priests accompanied him, so whether he was alone or accompanied, he was the first to enter or exit. Yahweh’s privacy and dignity were thus further symbolized by the ruling that his house could not be invaded without proper warning. A house that could be entered and exited casually would hardly constitute a royal domicile for the Lord of Glory. Did God actually need to hear the bells to know that the high priest, with or without other priests accompanying him, had entered the tabernacle? Hardly. Once again the value of a part of the vestments resided not in its actual required function but in the symbolism of that function relative to the covenant reality established by God for the benefit of his people.”25

Interestingly, on the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16:4), the high priest would lay aside this robe and the color ephod and breastpiece and wore simple linen garments of the priest or Levite, which is a picture of the condescension of our Great High Priest, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. The laying aside of his color garments by the high priest on the Day of Atonement spoke of our Lord veiling His deity by becoming a human being and suffering a substitutionary spiritual and physical death on the cross in order to serve sinful humanity. This condescension is spoken of by Paul in Philippians 2:1-11 and is symbolized by the Lord when He laid aside His garments to wash the feet of His disciples in John 13. Condescension of the Son of God

John 13:1 Now before the Feast of the Passover, Jesus knowing that His hour had come that He would depart out of this world to the Father, having loved His own who were in the world, He loved them to the end. 2 During supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, to betray Him, 3 Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into His hands, and that He had come forth from God and was going back to God, 4 got up from supper, and laid aside His garments; and taking a towel, He girded Himself. 5 Then He poured water into the basin, and began to wash the disciples’ feet and to wipe them with the towel with which He was girded. 6 So He came to Simon Peter. He said to Him, “Lord, do You wash my feet?” 7 Jesus answered and said to him, “What I do you do not realize now, but you 25 Stuart, D. K. (2007). Vol. 2: Exodus (electronic ed.). Logos Library System; The New American Commentary (614–615). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.


27

will understand hereafter.” 8 Peter said to Him, “Never shall You wash my feet!” Jesus answered him, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me.” 9 Simon Peter said to Him, “Lord, then wash not only my feet, but also my hands and my head.” 10 Jesus said to him, “He who has bathed needs only to wash his feet, but is completely clean; and you are clean, but not all of you.” 11 For He knew the one who was betraying Him; for this reason He said, “Not all of you are clean.” 12 So when He had washed their feet, and taken His garments and reclined at the table again, He said to them, “Do you know what I have done to you? 13 You call Me Teacher and Lord; and you are right, for so I am. 14 If I then, the Lord and the Teacher, washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet. 15 For I gave you an example that you also should do as I did to you. 16 Truly, truly, I say to you, a slave is not greater than his master, nor is one who is sent greater than the one who sent him. 17 If you know these things, you are blessed if you do them. 18 I do not speak of all of you. I know the ones I have chosen; but it is that the Scripture may be fulfilled, ‘He who eats My bread has lifted up his heel against Me.’ 19 From now on I am telling you before it comes to pass, so that when it does occur, you may believe that I am He. 20 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who receives whomever I send receives Me; and he who receives Me receives Him who sent Me.” (NASB95)

Philippians 2:1 Therefore if there is any encouragement in Christ, if there is any consolation of love, if there is any fellowship of the Spirit, if any affection and compassion, 2 make my joy complete by being of the same mind, maintaining the same love, united in spirit, intent on one purpose. 3 Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; 4 do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. 5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. (NASB95)

“Emptied” is the third person singular aorist active indicative form of the verb kenoo. Kenotic theology spawned from this verb in Philippians 2:7. In this passage, this verb is employed with the reflexive pronoun heautou, “Himself.” The verb’s usage goes back to the fifth century B.C. during the Age of Pericles of Athens. The word was used by the Herodotus, Thucydides, Hippocrates, Plato, Aeschylus, Josephus and Philo.

Liddell and Scott list the following meanings of the word in classical literature: (1) “To empty” (2) “To be emptied, to be made or left empty” (3) “To desert a place” (4) “To empty be depletion, to evacuate” (5) “To make away with” (6) “To


28

expend” (7) “To waste away, shrivel” (8) “To make empty (metaphorically), to make void or of no effect.” Albrecht Oepke list the following meanings of the word in his research: (1) “To make empty” (2) “To deprive of content or possession,” mostly with a genitive of object more rarely of person, or absolute. (3) “To empty” (medically) (4) “To be desolate” (passive) (5) “To nullify, destroy” (6) “To come to nothing” (passive).26

Louw and Nida list the following meanings for the verb (Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains, volume 2): (1) To take away the power or significance of something – ‘to cause to lose power, to cause to be emptied of power, to make powerless’27 (2) To completely remove or eliminate elements of high status or rank by eliminating all privileges or prerogatives associated with such status or rank – ‘to empty oneself, to divest oneself of position’.28 A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature-Third Edition lists the following meanings for the word: (1) to make empty, to empty (a) of desertion by an earthly spirit (b) divestiture of position and prestige: of Christ who gave up the appearance of his divinity and took on the form of a slave (2) to cause to be without result of effect, destroy, render void, or of no effect.29 There are only two instances of kenoo in the Septuagint (Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible) (Jer. 14:2; 15:9). The Hebrew equivalent in each case is the pulal of `amal, “to waste away, languish.”

The word appears fives times in the Greek New Testament (Rom. 4:14; 1 Cor. 1:17; 9:15; 2 Cor. 9:3; Phil. 2:7). It is found exclusively in the Pauline corpus.

The New Testament uses the verb kenoo in a literal and metaphorical sense. In Philippians 2:7, the literal sense of “emptied himself” appears in the RSV, NSRV, NET Bible and the NASB. However, the metaphorical sense of “made himself nothing” appears in the NIV and ESV. The KJV and NKJV interpret a metaphorical sense for the verb by rendering it “made himself of no reputation.”

The literal translation is incorrect and inaccurate since our Lord did not empty Himself of anything during His incarnation since He was still God according to Philippians 2:6.

Philippians 2:6, “who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped.”

“In the form of God” is the prepositional phrase en morphe theou refers to the fact that Jesus Christ has a divine essence or nature. The expression to einai isa theo, “equality with God” also affirms the deity of our Lord and explicitly teaches 26 Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, volume 3, page 661 27 page 683 28 page 740 29 Page 539


29

that Jesus Christ is God, equal to the Father and the Spirit. This expression should be translated “existing equally in essence with God.” Therefore, we can see that the expressions “form of God” and “equality with God” affirm the deity of Jesus Christ.

Now, the translation “emptied himself” in Philippians 2:7 is not only inaccurate because our Lord did not empty Himself of anything but also because it conveys the idea that our Lord emptied Himself of His divine attributes or deity. This view is totally false since to say that Christ emptied Himself of His divine attributes is to say that He ceased to be God. Also, notice that the text of Philippians 2:7 says absolutely nothing about His divine attributes. Thus, to say that the verb kenoo refers to the fact that Jesus voluntarily denied Himself the use of His divine attributes or restricted their use as Walvoord states, is in error. Nor, does the text say that our Lord abandoned some substantial measure of independence in the use of his divine prerogatives as Carson contends. The reason both views are incorrect is that the text does not say anything about His attributes. Therefore, the translation to “deny Himself” would be incorrect. The context tells us that the metaphorical sense of kenoo is being used by Paul in Philippians 2:7 and not the literal sense. There are two participial clauses that follow this verb that make clear that the verb should be rendered “He made himself nothing” or “of no reputation.”

The first participle clause is morphe doulou labon, which is translated by the NASB “taking the form of a bond-servant” and “taking the very nature of a servant” by the NIV and “by taking on the form of a slave” by the NET Bible. The second is en homoiomati anthropon genomenos, which is rendered by the NASB “being made in the likeness of men” and “being made in human likeness” by the NIV and “by looking like other men” by the NET Bible. The participle form of the verbs lambano, “taking” and ginomai, “being made” are what we call in Greek grammar a “participle of means” meaning that they indicate the means by which the action of a finite verb is accomplished. These two words are defining the verb kenoo, which is vague and begs to be defined. Therefore, these two participial clauses that are formed by these two verbs are presenting to the reader “the means by which” the Son of God “made Himself nothing” or of “no reputation.” Thus, the NET Bible captures the idea of the participles better than the other translations. So Paul is teaching us that God the Son made Himself of nothing or inconsequential or of no significance or we could say of no reputation by “by having assumed the essence of a slave by being born in the likeness of men.” (Author’s translation)

So we can see that in actuality the verb kenoo in Philippians 2:7 is not referring to our Lord’s divine attributes but rather it is pointing to His human nature. The


30

statements “taking the form of a bond-servant” and “being made in the likeness of men” are obvious references to our Lord’s human nature. Both are connected to the verb kenoo since the verb lambano, “taking” and ginomai, “being made” are participle of means meaning that they are indicating the means which the action of the verb kenoo is accomplished! This means that our Lord made Himself nothing or of no reputation by becoming a servant and being made in the likeness of men, though He had no sin nature like other men. Our Lord made Himself nothing in the sense that through His human nature and servanthood, He veiled from the rest of sinful humanity, His divine nature. This in turn resulted in the removal from the view of the rest of sinful humanity, all the elements of His high status and rank as the Son of God. Through His human nature and servanthood, He eliminated from the view of the rest of sinful humanity all the privileges and prerogatives associated with His status or rank as the Son of God. He was still exercising His attributes during His incarnation but not in the presence or full view of the human race except when it was according to the Father’s will to do so such as in His transfiguration (Matthew 17:1-3). Our Lord was still ruling and holding the universe together during His First Advent even though He added to His deity and sinless human nature.

Therefore, we can see that the Lord Jesus Christ did not empty Himself of anything. He certainly did not empty Himself of His divine attributes since the text of Philippians 2:6-8 does not say this. In fact, as we noted earlier, the text says nothing about His divine attributes. However, the text does say that God the Son made Himself nothing or of no consequence or of no reputation in the eyes of men by assuming the essence of a slave and by becoming a human being.

In this condition, He did not (not could not) manifest His divine nature. It was veiled. He still possessed this divine nature even though He added to this divine nature, a human nature. He did not cease to be God as a human being. His human nature and servanthood served as a temporary veil for His divine nature. At His transfiguration, our Lord manifested His divine nature to Peter, James and John.

Matthew 17:1-3, “Six days later Jesus took with him Peter, James, and John the brother of James, and led them privately up a high mountain. And he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became white as light.” (NET Bible)

God the Son humbled Himself by assuming the nature of a slave and a slave’s existence revolves around serving others. God the Son humbled Himself by being born in the likeness of humanity. The Lord Jesus Christ did not assert His superiority over members of the human race in order to benefit Himself but rather chose not to assert His superiority over members of the human race in order to serve them.


31

Humility is choosing not to assert an easily demonstrated superiority over others. Arrogance seeks to assert an easily demonstrated superiority over others. Paul uses this text in Philippians 2:6-8 to impress upon the Philippian church to be humble and serve each other just as their Lord humbled Himself by becoming a human being and making Himself of no consequence to serve sinful mankind by dying for their sins.

Therefore, the verb kenoo in Philippians 2:7 presents to us the “condescension” of our Lord. Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (11th Edition) defines the term “voluntary descent from one’s rank or dignity in relations with an inferior.” If we paraphrase this definition and apply it to this verb kenoo in Philippians 2:7, we can see that this verb depicts the condescension of our Lord in that He voluntarily descended from His rank and dignity as sovereign God by making Himself nothing or of no reputation or consequence in the eyes of the human race by becoming a human being and a servant at that in order to die for the sins of the world. Exodus 28:36-38: The Turban Forehead Plate

Exodus 28:36 “You shall also make a plate of pure gold and shall engrave on it, like the engravings of a seal, ‘Holy to the Lord.’ 37 You shall fasten it on a blue cord, and it shall be on the turban; it shall be at the front of the turban. 38 It shall be on Aaron’s forehead, and Aaron shall take away the iniquity of the holy things which the sons of Israel consecrate, with regard to all their holy gifts; and it shall always be on his forehead, that they may be accepted before the Lord.” (NASB95) These verses refer to the important feature of the turban, which the high priest was to wear while serving in the tabernacle. It has yet to be described and is so in verse 39. The Lord tells Moses that on the front of the turban would be a special gold forehead plate, which was to bear the inscription “Holy to the Lord.” This plate symbolized Aaron’s role as the representative of the Israelites in relation to the atonement as indicated by the phrase in verse 38 “Aaron shall take away the iniquity of the holy things which the sons of Israel consecrated, with regards to all their holy gifts.” This clause teaches that without the forehead piece on the turban he wore while serving in the tabernacle, Aaron’s role as representative on behalf of the Israelites in seeking forgiveness for sins through the various offerings would be nullified.

This forehead piece was a reminder to Aaron and the Israelites that Aaron’s service in the tabernacle was performed by means of faith in order to fulfill the purpose of receiving the forgiveness of sins from the Lord with the result that the Israelites would be holy in the presence of the Lord. They received the forgiveness of sins and were restored to fellowship as a result of their faith that Aaron’s actions


32

were done in obedience to the Lord. Based upon Aaron’s faithfulness, they received the forgiveness of their sins and were restored to fellowship. So the gold piece on the turban symbolized the meaning behind Aaron’s actions as high priest. This is a picture of Christ and the believer.

In order to be declared justified by God and be entered into an eternal relationship with a holy God, the sinner must have faith in the Great High Priest Jesus Christ’s death on the cross. After conversion, in order to be restored to fellowship, the justified sinner must confess his sins to the Father. Based upon the merits of Jesus Christ’s death on the cross, he is restored to fellowship with God who is holy (1 John 1:9). To confess one’s sins to the Father as a believer in order to be restored to fellowship is an act of faith on the part of the believer. The Israelites at this point in the narrative were already declared justified according to Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 10. Thus, Exodus 28:38 is speaking of the Israelites’ faith which results in the restoration to fellowship. Therefore, the sinner is accepted by God who is holy because of the Great High Priest, Jesus Christ and His substitutionary spiritual and physical deaths on the cross. The justified sinner after conversion is restored to fellowship with God who is holy based upon the merits of Jesus Christ and His substitutionary spiritual and physical deaths on the cross. Therefore, church age believers today are restored to fellowship as a result of confessing their sins to the Father, which is an act of faith in the work of Jesus Christ on the cross for them. Thus, in the same way the justified sinner is restored to fellowship with a holy God because of his faith in Jesus Christ’s death on the cross for him so the nation of Israel was restored to fellowship based upon their faith in the actions of their high priest Aaron who typified our Great High Priest Jesus Christ. Thus, Exodus 28:36-38 emphasizes with the Israelites then and church age believers today that God wants His people to be holy like Him which demands that they remain in fellowship with Him and confess their sins to Him when they do sin. This passage is in relation to experiential sanctification.

“Sanctification” is a technical theological term for the believer who has been set apart through the baptism of the Spirit at the moment of conversion in order to serve God exclusively and is accomplished in three stages: (1) Positional (2) Experiential (3) Perfective. All three stages of sanctification refer to the process of conforming the believer into the image of Jesus Christ, which is the Father’s plan from eternity past (Romans 8:28-30).

Sanctification is all about the believer experiencing the holiness or perfect character of God in his life through his thoughts, words and actions. It demands holiness or perfect character from the believer. It demands that the believer live by the power of the Spirit and the Word through the process of fellowship. It demands


33

that the believer lives in the new Christ nature that he received through regeneration. He cannot experience fellowship with God without experiencing the holiness of God. If God is holy and He is, then the believer must be holy as well. In fact, every believer is commanded in Scripture to be as holy as God (1 Peter 1:14-16).

Fellowship means being in the presence of God and being in the presence of God means that one is holy as God. God is holy and because He is holy the believer must be as holy as God in order to come into His presence. Therefore, fellowship with God demands that the believer approach God with reverence. This is accomplished by acknowledging any known sin to the Father in order to be restored to fellowship and maintaining that fellowship by obedience to the Spirit’s teaching which is found in the Word of God. It demands that the believer be honest with God since God is light and can reveal the hidden motives and thoughts of the believer as well as knowing all his actions (1 John 1:5-10).

Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary defines “holiness” as “the quality or state of being holy; sanctity” and they define “sanctity” as, “sacred or hallowed character.” One of the definitions that Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary gives for the adjective “holy” is, “entitled to worship or profound religious reverence because of divine character or origin or connection with God or divinity.” One of the definitions for the noun “character” that Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary provides that applies to the context of our passage is the following: “the aggregate of features and traits that form the apparent individual nature of some person or thing.” If we paraphrase these definitions, we would say that the God’s holiness refers to “the aggregate (i.e. sum total) of perfect features and traits that form the divine nature of God.” Thus, God’s holiness is related to all of His divine attributes or in other words, it is simply the harmony of all His perfections or attributes. The holiness of God is the aggregate of perfect divine attributes that form the nature of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. Thus, God’s holiness is related to all of His divine attributes. Therefore, the term “holiness” refers to the absolute perfection of the character of God, expressing His purity of character or moral perfection and excellence, thus making God totally separate from sin and sinners. He is totally separate from sin and sinners unless a way can be found to constitute them holy and that way has been provided based upon the merits of the impeccable Person and Finished Work of the Lord Jesus Christ on the Cross.


34

The presence of evil, sin and injustice is totally absent in the character of God, thus God does not tolerate evil or sin because it is contrary to His character, i.e. His inherent moral qualities, ethical standards and principles. Holiness is used often to describe the Person of God. Leviticus 22:2 “Tell Aaron and his sons to be careful with the holy gifts of the sons of Israel, which they dedicate to Me, so as not to profane My holy name; I am the LORD.” (NASB95) 1 Peter 1:14 As obedient children, do not be conformed to the former lusts which were yours in your ignorance, 15 but like the Holy One who called you, be holy yourselves also in all your behavior; 16 because it is written, “YOU SHALL BE HOLY, FOR I AM HOLY.” (NASB95) 1 Chronicles 16:10 “Glory in His holy name; Let the heart of those who seek the LORD be glad.” (NASB95) Psalm 30:4 Sing praise to the LORD, you His godly ones, and give thanks to His holy name. (NASB95) Psalm 97:12 Be glad in the LORD, you righteous ones, and give thanks to His holy name. (NASB95) This absolute perfection of God’s character is celebrated throughout the Scriptures. Isaiah 6:3 And one called out to another and said, “Holy, Holy, Holy, is the LORD of hosts, The whole earth is full of His glory.” (NASB95) Revelation 4:8 And the four living creatures, each one of them having six wings, are full of eyes around and within; and day and night they do not cease to say, “HOLY, HOLY, HOLY IS THE LORD GOD, THE ALMIGHTY, WHO WAS AND WHO IS AND WHO IS TO COME.” (NASB95) The title “His Holy Name” refers to the perfect character of the Person of God. The Lord Jesus Christ revealed the holiness or character of God during His 1st Advent. John 1:18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.” (NASB95) Therefore, holiness pertains to the sum total of God’s invisible attributes, which compose the absolute perfection of His character.

Holiness for the believer is Christ-likeness, which is the reproduction of Christ-like character in the believer, i.e. spiritual maturity. It is the reproduction of the character and life of Christ in the believer, which is accomplished by the Holy Spirit in the believer who obeys the Spirit’s voice, which is heard through the communication of the Word of God.

Being holy is being like Christ who is holy. We are holy when we are thinking, speaking and acting like Christ and this all begins with adopting the mind of Christ


35

in your thinking. The more the believer matures, the more he will experience the holiness of God in his life.

The believer who obeys the voice of the Spirit, which is heard through the Word of God will reflect the holiness of God. The more the believer reflects the holiness of God by being obedient to the Spirit, the more he will reflect the holiness of God thereby glorify Him. The more he reflects the holiness of God, the more intimate the believer’s fellowship with God will be. The believer’s intimacy with God will grow in direct proportion to his reflecting the holiness of God.

The believer who is obedient to the Spirit’s voice, which is heard through the communication of the Word of God enables the Spirit to reproduce the life and character of Christ in him and to empower and guide him in doing the will of the Father, which is to be conformed to the image of Christ. The will of the Father from eternity past is that the believer be conformed to the image of Christ (Rm. 8:28-29; 12:1-2; Phlp. 3:2-21; Eph. 4:12-24). Thus, the will of the Father from eternity past is that the believer be perfectly holy as the Lord Jesus Christ is.

Therefore, the responsibility of us as members of the body of Christ is to manifest the Person of Christ. The Spirit enables us to, but this is hindered and brought to a complete stop when we sin and are out of fellowship.

So the church’s function as the body of Christ is to manifest the Person of Christ or in other words, the Light of Christ and this is why Paul desired that Christ would be manifested in his physical body in Philippians 1:21. This is why Paul exhorts the Philippians in Philippians 2:14-16 to exhibit the Word of life.

When we sin and get out of fellowship we are in effect hindering the Spirit’s work of manifesting the Light or the perfect character of Christ in our physical bodies!

Holiness for the believer is not morality although morality will be the result of experiencing the holiness of God in one’s life. Morality is not the basis for experiencing the holiness of God in one’s life but rather it is the result of fellowship with God that is the result of obeying the Spirit’s voice in the Word of God. Exodus 28:39: The High Priest’s Tunic, Turban and Sash

Exodus 28:39 “You shall weave the tunic of checkered work of fine linen, and shall make a turban of fine linen, and you shall make a sash, the work of a weaver.” (NASB95)

The tunic was a long white coat worn beneath the robe of the ephod and was more complete than a loincloth and reached to the knees. The standard garment worn by both men and women in the biblical period was a linen tunic. Worn next to the skin, ankle length, with long sleeves, it provided protection from the sun and


36

sometimes was embroidered or given a fancy hem by the wealthy (Gen 37:3 and 2 Sam 13:18–19) or by priests.30 The sash was a wide belt worn around the waist of the high priest and was to be the work of an embroiderer. Exodus 28:40-43: Garments for the Other Priests

Exodus 28:40 “For Aaron’s sons you shall make tunics; you shall also make sashes for them, and you shall make caps for them, for glory and for beauty. 41 You shall put them on Aaron your brother and on his sons with him; and you shall anoint them and ordain them and consecrate them, that they may serve Me as priests. 42 You shall make for them linen breeches to cover their bare flesh; they shall reach from the loins even to the thighs. 43 They shall be on Aaron and on his sons when they enter the tent of meeting, or when they approach the altar to minister in the holy place, so that they do not incur guilt and die. It shall be a statute forever to him and to his descendants after him.” (NASB95) In verse 40, the Lord instructs Moses that he is to make tunics, sashes and caps for Aarons’ sons which were for dignity and honor in the sense that these articles would provide them with high status in the Israelite community so that they are respected. In verse 41, the Lord instructs Moses to clothe Aaron’s sons with these articles and anoint, ordain and sanctify them in order that they might serve Him as priests. “You shall anoint” is the verb mā·šǎḥ (ָמַׁשח) (maw-shakh´), which refers to the symbolic act of pouring oil on Aaron’s sons in order to dedicate them for service in the tabernacle. “Ordain” is composed of the verb mā·lē(ʾ) (ָמֵלא) (maw-lay´) which means “to fill” and the noun yāḏ (ָיד) (yawd), which means “hand.” Thus, it literally means “to fill the hand” but figuratively is an expression for the consecration offering for the priesthood and which offering is noted in Leviticus 8:33. This expression speaks of putting the priestly responsibilities under the control of Aaron’s sons. “Consecrate” is the verb qā·ḏǎš (ָקַדׁש) (kaw-dash´), which refers to setting apart Aaron’s sons to serve the Lord in the tabernacle as priests. The “linen breeches” mentioned in verse 42 refer to undergarments which had a trouser-like or pant-like foundation which ensured no accidental uncovering of the waist and genital areas.

In the ancient world, most people did not wear underwear. Even though Levitical priests eventually wore undergarments (Exodus 28:42), there was always the risk of the worshipper or priest’s genitals being exposed as he walked up steps, 30 Matthews, V. H., Chavalas, M. W., & Walton, J. H. (2000). The IVP Bible background commentary : Old Testament (electronic ed.) (Ex 28:41). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.


37

which would insult God. Thus, the Lord wants Aaron’s sons to wear underwear so that they do not sin in His presence and be executed.

Unlike the common people, the priests were required to wear linen undergarments beneath their tunics in order to cover their genitals. Thus they would not expose their nakedness when climbing the altar stairs or cleaning around it. Nudity, although common among Mesopotamian priests, was prohibited in Israelite practice.31 Wiersbe writes “Aaron’s sons served as priests and had to wear the assigned garments. The fine linen of all the garments reminds us of the righteousness that ought to characterize our walk and our service. If the priests did not wear the proper garments, they were in danger of death. The priests of the heathen cults sometimes conducted their rituals in a lewd manner, but the Lord’s priests were to cover their nakedness and practice modesty.”32

Hannah writes “Because God is holy, the priests were to approach Him with dignity and care. Otherwise they would incur guilt and die (cf. v. 35). Aaron and his sons were to dress appropriately when they entered the tabernacle (the Tent of Meeting) or approached the altar (presumably the altar of incense) to serve before the Lord.”33

The last statement in verse 43 “It shall be a statute forever to him and to his descendants after him” refers to all the regulations presented in chapter 28.

31 Matthews, V. H., Chavalas, M. W., & Walton, J. H. (2000). The IVP Bible background commentary : Old Testament (electronic ed.) (Ex 28:43). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. 32 Wiersbe, W. W. (1993). Wiersbe's expository outlines on the Old Testament (Ex 28:40–43). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books. 33 Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary. (1983-). The Bible knowledge commentary : An exposition of the scriptures (Ex 28:43). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.


38

exodus chapter twenty-eight overview of exodus … chapter twenty-eight overview of exodus chapter...

Documents