THE OFFERING PRIEST
[p. 61] THE OFFERING PRIEST
Luke 1: 5 - 20; Luke 4: 18, 19; Luke 23: 27 - 46; Luke 24: 46 - 53; Romans 15: 15 - 19
I daresay you will hardly understand my purpose in reading these scriptures, but they have a connection in my mind and in them we really trace the course of Christ. It is intimately connected of course with the way in which Christ is presented in this particular gospel. In Matthew the kingdom of heaven is established in Christ; He is the Sun of righteousness in heaven. In the gospel of John He is presented more in the light of the Ark of the Covenant and the Mercy Seat; but in the gospel of Luke we have Him taken from among men; His genealogy is traced right back from Adam. The point of the gospel is Man taken from among men and eventually going up to God. Morally down here He was the Priest. There is one parable in chapter 10, that of the good Samaritan, which indicates it. The priest and the Levite failed, neither of them could deal with the man that was half dead, and Christ, the Neighbour, undertakes priestly service with regard to the man. He comes in to fill not simply the place of the Levite but the place of the priest. His service was priestly. He poured in oil and wine, set him on His own beast, brought him to an inn and took care of him so long as he was in circumstances to need care. The priest and the Levite were unprofitable, they could do nothing with the man, but all was fulfilled in Christ.
For us that is the introduction of a better hope by which we draw nigh to God. “Through him we have both access by one Spirit to the Father”. We draw nigh as priests, but we are priests on account of our relation to the High Priest, like the [p. 62] sons of Aaron who drew nigh because they were kindred to the high priest.
Now I want to mark the transition from Aaron to Christ and also to show the consequence of it which comes out at the close of the gospel. You get the consequence of it, too, coming out in Paul. The priestly service began with the Lord but it comes out in a remarkable way in the apostle Paul. He says, “For me to be minister of Christ Jesus to the nations” — he was ministering in priestly service in order that “the offering up of the nations might be acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit”, Romans 15: 16.
In Luke 1 you get taken up every thread of piety that existed among the Jews. It is the more remarkable because this gospel was written by a gentile. The priest Zacharias and his wife were God-fearing people, “walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless”. They were of the priestly line. Zacharias gets the announcement of the birth of a son, but he is not up to the announcement, and the result of it is that for the time being he comes under the judgment of God. This sets forth really that the line of Aaron failed, and failed in a very good representative. The angel told him that he should be dumb until what was spoken was fulfilled. It indicates the position of the line of Aaron to the present day. How can a dumb man speak the praises of God? It forms a kind of landmark. That order of things was about to come to an end. It could not possibly be otherwise because the mind of God was contemplating at that moment the birth of Christ. John the baptist comes before us not as priest, though he was the son of a priest, but as a prophet. The priesthood broke down in the Aaronic line because the true priest was just about to come into the scene.
[p. 63] Now look at chapter 4: 16 - 19. We get here what was essential in the case of priesthood. No man could exercise priestly function unless he was anointed with the holy oil. So the Lord says, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised”. There was an end in view in the Lord’s priestly service down here and that was that there might be a company to offer up to God. You get the idea of it in Leviticus 23:15-17, where on the day of Pentecost there was the offering of the two wave loaves. There was leaven allowed in the two wave loaves, but they were presented to God in the sanctification of the Spirit. That was a type of the result of the priestly service of the Lord Jesus when He was here — even that there might be the offering up of an acceptable sacrifice to God on the part of God’s people down here.
I can understand people making dispensational difficulties about it and saying that Christ was not a priest till He went to the right hand of God; but in anticipation of that I cannot question that Christ did a great deal of priestly work down here. See what He said to Peter before his fall, “I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not”. That was priestly work. Christ when He was here was the anointed vessel to bring about a certain result and that was that there should be an offering up to God, a company acceptable to Him, and that was priestly work.
Now pass on to another point in connection with the death of Christ — chapter 23: 28, 34, 43, 46. There is a very great contrast between the way in which the death of Christ is presented in this gospel and in the gospels of Matthew and Mark. In the two latter you have Him as the Victim — He is [p. 64] viewed as suffering vicariously; but in the gospel of Luke what is prominent is the offering Priest. It is as evident as possible that the only victim which He could offer was Himself, and moreover no one could offer the Victim but Himself. There again we get the Spirit brought in, He “by the eternal Spirit offered himself spotless to God”. What marks the offering Priest is evidently the eternal Spirit, which indicates that the mind of the offering Priest was in perfect accord with the mind of God. You get all the detail of that brought out in Luke. When the Lord was going to the cross He is not concerned about Himself; He says to the women, “Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves” (chapter 23: 28). Then for those who crucified Him he takes the intercessory place. “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do” (verse 34). He was entirely in the gracious mind of God. You get the same thing coming out in connection with the thief, “Today shalt thou be with me in paradise”. The mind of God was perfect unalloyed grace. Then, “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit”. You could not have a more wonderful relation given than in that passage in Luke. There is the presentation to us of perfection — not exactly in the victim, though of course there was that, but in the One who offered Himself by the eternal Spirit without spot to God. The victim was ended in death, but what abides to us is the Priest, and that is a point of the greatest moment to us. The victim represents man after the flesh, which Christ ended in His death, and God will never revive him. The offering Priest abides still and is exactly the same as what He was when He offered Himself without spot to God.
I think you and I want to have a greater sense of the perfectness of the offering Priest. A great [p. 65] many people have a sense of the perfectness of the victim. The victim was perfect, but the victim in that sense has passed away. Christ is no longer known after the flesh; that has been terminated in His death; but as the offering Priest He abides: He is the same yesterday, today and for ever.
I would call your attention now to verses 46 - 53 of chapter 24, and in connection with that Psalm 68: 18; Ephesians 4: 7 - 10. We have in this last passage in Luke the accomplishment of Psalm 68. In the act of blessing the disciples He was parted from them and carried up into heaven. Blessing the disciples was a priestly act. Whenever you find blessing going on in the Old Testament it is priestly. You get Abraham blessing Isaac, Isaac blessing Jacob, Jacob blessing his twelve sons. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were not ordained priests, but all the family of the priests spring out of Abraham. What do you think enabled them to bless? They were in the secret of God. I do not hesitate to say that it is the priest who knows the mind of God, because he has access to God, and because he knows the mind of God he blesses. Melchisedec was able to bless Abraham, because he was the priest of the Most High God; he was in the mind of God. In this passage (verses 50, 51) we have the Lord blessing. He had been offering Priest, He was qualified, He had made atonement for the sins of the people. He was not only qualified, but the point to my mind is that He was capable. All that transpired in connection with the offering of Christ proved how perfectly He was in the secret of God’s mind. Therefore you can well understand that when He was being parted from them He was blessing them. It was a priestly act; He was the true Priest after the order of Melchisedec, and in the act of blessing He was parted from them. He says, “Behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you”. Of necessity therefore [p. 66] He must ascend, as you get in Psalm 68. In Ephesians 4: 10 there is a very important point, the One who descended is the same also that ascended. He came down here to do the will of God, but He ascended up as Priest that He might communicate the gift of the Spirit. The sending of the promise of the Father was on the line of blessing. That and His blessing the disciples were both priestly acts.
It all opens up to us the transition from Aaron to Christ. The announcement of the heavenly host (chapter 2) was, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men”, because a Man was taken from among men. Then you get the anointing of the Spirit (chapter 4) in order that He might carry out the ministration of divine mercy upon earth. Then you have the very many traits of the perfectness of the offering Priest coming out in the death of Christ, and then in resurrection you have Him carrying out the true Melchisedec function of blessing and sending the promise of Father from on high.
From the first moment priesthood is presented in Scripture the thought of blessing is included in it. One thing on which Christ is bent at the present time in His service to us is to make us conscious of blessing, and if people are not conscious of blessing they do not get all the good of the service of the Priest. Christ would maintain us in the consciousness of blessing.
The disciples were no longer under malediction. Grace had abounded over guilt, blessing over cursing. All had been changed by redemption, and the function of the Lord is to make them conscious of blessing, and so the Lord would serve us. What I understand by blessing is the consciousness of divine favour. Christ has become Priest to that end. He was going to the right hand of God in order [p. 67] that He might communicate the promise of the Father — the power from on high. The power from on high came upon the apostle Paul, and he says that he was Jesus Christ’s minister to the gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, “that the offering up of the nations might be acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit”, Romans 15: 16.
It is a great thing for us to be in the good of it all. Christ would maintain us in the consciousness of blessing and nearness to God. The promise of the Father abides; it has never been removed. The attitude in which Christ left the earth is the attitude of Christ still, so that we can be maintained in the good of the blessing. Christianity is a living thing. It is not a belief of doctrines; you get nothing by faith, though you have nothing without faith, but everything you get is communicated to you in the power of the Spirit. Hence it is that christianity in every part of it is vital and experimental.