Published: May 1, 2025 | Speaker: Chuck Hartman | Series: Leviticus - The Parable of Leviticus 2 - Part 11 | Scripture: Hebrews 9-10
Transcript
View Full Transcript →
0:02
in all that we do, you would guide us and be pleased with what the work of the Holy Spirit is accomplishing within us. For we ask this in Jesus name. Amen.
0:16
So tonight we're going to attempt to uh apply the annual ritual of
0:31
Okay, good. Good. No intermission. Just going. All right. Oh. Oh, four. Oh, dear. That sounds
0:44
Yeah, I wish I were. Um, well, I've been there. So, being asleep during it is better than being awake. So uh so tonight we're going to look again at the annual ritual of Yam Kapor
0:56
but from the perspective of the finished work of Jesus Christ. And as I mentioned last week uh pretty much from the earliest days of the
1:08
church writers uh held pretty much as an axiom that that Jesus is the scapegoat. Um the problem is twofold in that. First
1:20
one, the major problem is that there's really no explicit testimony to that effect in the New Testament. And we're going to investigate that some tonight.
1:30
But there certainly is no place where he is he is called the scapegoat. There's really no place where he's called a goat at all. So we're going to talk about that.
1:41
And then the second problem is that as you read the the historical treatment of Jesus as the scapegoat, you find tremendous inconsistencies among the writers and a
1:53
lot of very fanciful and allegorical interpretation as well. So I think what's what's working here is a sense that we read John 1:29, behold the lamb
2:07
of God who takes away the sins of the world. And we see this ritual of the day of atonement and I think we naturally and
2:18
understandably look to Jesus as the fulfillment of what's going on that day. And and so um a lot of you could read
2:30
Tertullian, you could read Origin, you you could read quite a number Augustine and they don't say the same thing. um they all think he's the scapegoat, but their analysis of the difference between
2:41
the two goats is is really not at all biblical. And biblical. And um it's more rabbitic, which as we saw
2:52
last week, concluded that the scapegoat was to be killed. Uh really made to die, not left to die, but made to die. And that's
3:03
not in Leviticus 16 at all, but that's where the second temple Judaism was. And much of the early church was embibing that same thought. And so the death of
3:16
Jesus Christ is seen widely as somehow fulfilling the role of the goat for Aazelle. Um, what we're going to try to do tonight is to wrestle with the New
3:28
Testament as to just how does Jesus fulfill that aspect of Yam Kapor. Um the first matter of business though
3:40
is just to kind of look at what the New Testament says in terms of metaphorical references to
3:50
Jesus in a sacrificial or or at least ceremonial manner. And and so what we we all are aware of
4:09
Nobody who's been a Christian for any length of time and read their Bibles has any trouble with associating Jesus as a lamb. I've already mentioned uh John the Baptist testimony in
4:26
John. Behold the lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. There is um 1 Corinthians chapter 5 uh po I'm not remembering the
4:39
verse I think it's seven but don't don't hold me to that where Paul says Christ our Passover has been
4:50
sacrificed lamb of God Passover lamb uh that's that's all very familiar to Christians Now um in that light however
5:01
we need to remind ourselves that Passover was not a sacrifice. It was not a it was not something that was brought to the tabernacle as an atoning or expedating
5:14
sacrifice. It was blood to mark the homes so that the angel of death would pass over. That means it is tremendously ceremonial, but it's not associated with
5:27
the day of atonement. And in fact, there's no mention of atonement in the Passover ritual or in the Passover instructions. So Christ is our Passover.
5:38
Very, very important, incredibly important, but it doesn't answer to Yam Kapor. It's it's a different feast and it was a completely different setting. The tabernacle had not yet been built
5:49
and God had not yet come to dwell with his people in that tabernacle. So Passover is is of a different nature as it were than Yam Kapor. Back in the Old
6:01
Testament, one of the most well-known passages Isaiah 53
6:12
um verse 7. He was oppressed and he was afflicted yet he opened not his mouth. He was led as a lamb to the slaughter and as a sheep before his shears is silent. So he
6:25
opened not his mouth. As a lamb led to slaughter. And then all the way at the other other end of of scripture, we
6:41
have Revelation 5 uh verses
6:56
4-7. So I wept much because no one was found worthy to open and read the scroll or to look of look on it. But one of the elders said to me, "Do not weep. Behold, the lion of the tribe of Judah, the root
7:07
of David has prevailed to open the scroll and to loose its seven seals. And I asked, and I looked, and behold, in the midst of the throne, and of the four
7:21
living creatures, and in the midst of the elders stood a lamb, as though it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God, sent out into all the earth. And
7:33
then he came and took the scroll out of the right hand of him who sat on the throne. the lamb who was slain. Christ our Passover has been
7:44
sacrificed. So, you know, we don't have any trouble with the idea of Christ metaphorically speaking as a sacrificial lamb. But, of course, a lamb wasn't
7:56
sacrificed on Yam Kapor. He was a goat. And and so making the connection between Yam Kapor and and I do believe there's a very strong connection between Yam Kapor
8:08
and the passion of Jesus Christ. But making that connection is not necessarily obvious because it seems to be uh somewhat of a completely different
8:18
paradigm. I guess the only way you can associate Jesus explicitly with the word goat is as it's used today, greatest of all time. I mean certainly he's better
8:29
than Tom Brady u you know so he he but as far as the Yam Kapor goat we we have a bit of a struggle trying to to make that connection biblically um at least
8:41
in explicit manner. Okay. So um I I don't um I don't doubt for a moment that Jesus is the fulfillment. The most explicit is
8:53
in Hebrews. And I I'd like to ask you to turn to Hebrews 9. We're going to spend some time in Hebrews 9 and looking at um what the writer of
9:03
Hebrews says because in Hebrews 9 and we've looked at it a number of times in this particular class because Hebrews is if if nothing else it is certainly a
9:14
commentary on the book of Leviticus. So Hebrews So Hebrews 9 talks about the regulations of divine
9:25
worship in the earthly sanctuary. Verse one, for there was a tabernacle prepared, the outer one in which were
9:37
the lampstand and the table and the sacred bread. This is called the holy place. And beyond the second veil there was a tabernacle or a tent which is
9:48
called the holy of holies having a golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold which was the with uh in which was
9:59
a golden jar holding the mana and Aaron's rod which budded and the tables the tables of the covenant.
10:14
Um, I think I'm correct. I I don't want to I don't want to say the writer of Hebrews got something wrong. Um, but I'm fairly certain the altar of incense was on the other side of the veil, not on the but be that as it may, um, he's
10:27
saying, you know, he's do going over the furnishings and he's doing it in kind of a of a general earthly I the key here is that is that um word in verse one, the
10:40
earthly sanctuary. And he talks about the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat. But of these things we cannot here speak in detail. But when these things have thus
10:52
been prepared, the priests are continually entering the outer tabernac tabernacle performing the divine worship, but into the second only the
11:03
high priest enters once a year and without take and not without taking blood which he offers for himself and for the sins of the people committed in
11:15
ignorance. That's Yam That's Yam Kapor. Okay. So that that sets the context of Hebrews 9 and 10 is this one time a year that the high priest goes
11:27
into the earthly sanctuary. Okay. So
11:41
um so we look at this uh the context is Yam Kipur the day of atonement but the
12:01
sanctuary. I I think that's really honestly the key to the author's point here. As he's been doing all through the book of Hebrews, he's deriving a contrast between the person and the work
12:13
of Jesus and that which was established through Moses with Israel in the wilderness. And he's not in any way denigrating what God established in the
12:24
wilderness with Israel. He's saying that as as good as that was, Jesus is so much better. He doesn't he doesn't have to put down the Levitical priesthood in
12:35
order to raise up Jesus. Jesus is already so much higher. And and this is probably one of the most um poignant indications of just um just
12:46
how high Jesus is above the earthly levitical or ironic priesthood because he he talks about let me see if I can find the
12:58
find the verse verse 8. The Holy Spirit is signifying this that the way into the holy place has not yet been disclosed while the outer tabernacle is still
13:08
standing which is a symbol for the present time. According accordingly both gifts and sacrifice are offered which cannot make the worshipper perfect in
13:30
headed. verses 11 and 12. This is the contrast. But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come,
13:40
he entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this
13:52
creation. So there's the primary point in Hebrews nine. And I think the primary point in in most of Hebrews is that all of this has been a parable. It's all been effective and
14:04
it's been gracious, but it was always pointing forward to something much much greater. And and so the writer of Hebrews is keying
14:16
on whether or not this tabernacle was made with human hands. The earthly The earthly tabernacle, the earthly sanctuary was
14:28
made with human hands. Now, we talked about this last week in discussing the impact of sin and contagion in the sanctuary, which
14:40
required the annual day of atonement to cleanse the uncleanness due to the people's iniquities and transgressions. even those as the writer of Hebrews does
14:51
say those that were committed in ignorance. So we we saw hopefully that sin within the camp even even ignorant sin and even ritual uncleanness that was
15:04
not as we saw through um Leviticus 12 134 and 134 and 15. These were not due to moral deficiency. These were not due to sin.
15:16
And yet the people were rendered unclean by so many everyday things in life that were not due to any individual personal sin. Now the whole concept of
15:28
uncleanness has its root in original sin. So sin is behind all of this. It's just further behind some things than others. And we we talked about this back
15:40
when we looked at Leviticus 1 through7. There's actually no provision made in those sacrifices for willful sin. And in
15:50
fact, Numbers goes on to tell us that there is no sacrifice for such sin. About the only sacrifice is is what David writes about in Psalm 51, and that
16:01
is a broken and contrite heart. There's no there's no blood that can wash away our rebellion against God. only repentance can can in any way uh access
16:12
his grace. But all of the sacrifices that you read about in Leviticus, they they're all for basically ignorant or sins sins if we if you remember sins of which you're not even
16:24
aware. Okay? So all of these things are are contaminating the um sanctuary. And one day a year, the high priest takes blood,
16:35
the the the the ritual detergent and into that sanctuary to purify it and to cleanse it from all of that accumulated uncleanness throughout the previous
16:47
year. Now, I I I don't know why I didn't use this last week, but I want I do want to throw in one more analogy. I don't want to get into a lengthy discussion about sin
16:59
about sin um and and how contagion actually operates. We we talked about it really didn't matter where in the camp the
17:11
uncleanness occurred, it still rendered somehow rendered the tabernacle and the sanctuary and most importantly the Holy of Holies just that more dirty.
17:24
and and I'm I'm reading a book about Isaac Newton and and his um many many years spent studying alchemy and one author has has theorized
17:36
that it was alchemy that enable it was very popular back then that the whole study of alchemy was still very popular in Newton's day but that his study of
17:46
alchemy allowed him to conceptualize the the the reality of gravity And the odd thing about gravity, the thing that made it so hard for
17:57
people to people to accept is the concept that gravity is force acting at a distance. That there's no connecting
18:08
matter between the two objects involved in a gravitational field. They're exercising force at a distance. That's that's been the
18:20
accepted definition of of gravity that it is a force um at a
18:33
distance. Well, in an analogous way, we talked about energy last week that it that it is a reality even though it doesn't have matter. It's not material. It's not substantive. Well, I think this one also sheds some light on the concept
18:44
of contagion. that sin is a force that operates at a distance. So I I hope that sheds a little bit of light on on the concept that we're dealing with here because
18:56
it's very important when we get to see what it is that Jesus did. We cannot fully understand what Jesus did if we don't better understand what the high
19:07
priest was doing one day a year when he entered with the blood of the bull and of the goat. Because Jesus did the same thing only with better blood and into a
19:25
sanctuary. Everybody see the parallel. Okay. So if if there is that parallel and I don't think you can read Hebrews 9 without seeing that that's what the writer is doing. He's saying okay only the high priest and once a year and not without blood. Okay that's what we've
19:37
just been reading about. And then he goes on, but Jesus, and he doesn't limit Jesus to what the high priest
19:48
did even did even perfectly. Jesus did a whole lot more than just perfectly do what the high priest did. Because to do what the high
20:00
priest did, Jesus would have had to take his blood into the holy of holies of the temple, which he didn't do. And the writer of Hebrews in these two chapters makes that clear that he couldn't have
20:13
done that. He wasn't of the tribe of Levi. He had no he had no right to go into that and he didn't do that. But what he did was so much more incredible
20:25
that it not only answered the the little microcosm, the little foreshadowing of what the high priest did, he did it for all time, never having to do it again.
20:39
So spatially and temporally, what Jesus did completely did completely eclipsed what the high priest was doing.
20:50
That make sense so far?
21:06
So in essence, it was just God's gracious. Yeah. That did it all because him taking the blood of the was really nothing. Well, well, I'm going to postpone that discussion till
21:19
Leviticus 17 when he really starts talking about the blood. And I think I I agree with you mostly. But I will also say that biblically and
21:31
therefore really blood matters. Yeah, you agree with that. The life is in the blood. But in Leviticus 17:11, we read, "I have given it to you
21:44
for atonement, which means it has no efficacy on its own." That's what and that's what you're saying. And to that extent, I absolutely agree. But but we can also say um but that doesn't make it
21:56
any less real because we can also say that our own individual salvation is entirely of grace. That doesn't make it any less
22:07
real. Okay. So the blood that was offered for Yam Kapor in and of itself didn't it didn't have any inherent power and that actually
22:19
differentiated Israel from the pagan nations to whom blood had power. Okay. Um and we'll talk about that Lord willing next week in Leviticus 7. No
22:29
yeah 17. So, and yet the excuse me, the sanctuary was nonetheless cleansed and God's grace was in a sense
22:42
renewed. Okay? So, it it was still a real atonement even though we recognize that the actual thing they were doing and the blood that they were shedding in and of
22:54
itself didn't as as the writer of Hebrews says is powerless to cleanse conscience. And in fact, the whole, you know, the high priest walked out of that sanctuary the same man as who walked in
23:07
earlier and and likely sinned at some point during that same day, you know, in some way. Uh it's it's to to an extent we could say it's kind of like going to
23:17
church. You know, we don't we don't come in dragging and and dragging our feet and then fly out. You know, we kind of go out the same people that went in and
23:29
oftentimes in that afternoon. Um you know, it's grace. But I I guess what I want to make sure we all are in agreement with is that saying that it's grace doesn't make it any less real. In
23:42
fact, in a sense, it makes it even more
23:52
Uh, yes. And that would be blatant. Yeah. Oh, absolutely. In fact, in the same way, right?
24:03
It is a part of it, but it is a mysterious part because we know that it is we work out our salvation with fear and trembling. For it is a God who is at work within you both to do and to will according to his pleasure. So So we know
24:15
that even in repentance and obedience, it's the work of the Holy Spirit within us. It's not ourselves. It it's the Holy Spirit. As Paul says, the life that I
24:25
now live, I live by faith in the son of God. So yeah, that that's very mysterious. It doesn't mean we just let go and let God, you know, it's all about grace. But what I'm saying is grace
24:36
doesn't make it any less real. It's still it's still the power of God into salvation. And that's very very real. But I also want to to make sure everybody gets where I'm coming from.
24:47
Sin is also a power. Sin is also a reality though it is not a substance. It nonetheless has influence of contagion
24:58
and it can operate at a distance. So that's what we're seeing in all of these purification rituals that culminate in Yam Kapor. So if all of these different
25:11
purification rituals in Leviticus 12 and Leviticus uh I should say 12 and 15, Leviticus 13 and 14 because they are paired even
25:24
though two of them are split. They all culminate in that day. And that one
25:46
massively points to Goltha. So this is why it's so important for us to understand the parable because without it we really don't understand what happened there.
25:56
And so what we end up doing, and this is called the Christian religion, is we substitute our theological explanation of what Christ did on the cross for what the Old Testament should
26:09
have prepared us to understand and for what the writers of the New Testament did understand. And this leads to a lot of denominational differences and a lot of
26:20
PMIC writings against Christian against Christian. And I'm not going to go there. I'm just simply saying that much of what the church believes should be challenged because it has been decoupled
26:33
from the Old Testament. And if it's been decoupled from the Old Testament, then it is not rooted in the redemptive plan of God. Okay? The Christianity did not was not
26:44
born in a vacuum. And certainly Christ's Yam Kapor's sacrifice of sacrifice of himself was not something that he just thought of doing that
26:55
morning. Okay? It was always something he was going to do because a body had been prepared for him, right? Because of this. All of this was pointing to what
27:07
Jesus would do. And then the writer of Hebrews says, "There it is." And and so we see the fulfillment. But I think we do better understand the fulfillment if we better understand the
27:19
shadows and the types. Which is why we've spent so much time in the detail, you might even say in the weeds. But I think it's very important because it it teaches us that and I think it's so
27:30
critical to understand that what we're not we're not dealing with the bad things we things we do. I mean the bad things we do are bad things. Yes.
27:42
things. Yes. But the purification rituals and even the sacrifices of Leviticus 1-7 were not about the bad things. Many of them were the good things like having children.
27:52
Many of them were the inevitable things like things dying. Okay? Many of them were inadvertent things. Many of them were completely out of control like skin affliction. The point being is just
28:04
living in a fallen world is corruption and uncleanness. and uncleanness. So no one can ever think, well, I'm not that bad. I I don't really need atonement. That whole mentality comes
28:16
from the idea that Job's friends had, you know, that it's all about what you do and if you do good, you'll get good. If you do bad, you'll get punished. No,
28:26
corruption is now throughout God's cosmos and needs to be cleansed, needs to be purified, and in that sins are
28:39
forgiven. Yes, but that's that's only a part of what Jesus did on Goltha. And I think the writer of Hebrews would probably say it wasn't even the greater part of
28:50
it. Because what the writer of Hebrews does is he takes us back to this one ritual where individual moral
29:01
failure is not even discussed. The only thing that is discussed is the uncleanness that has resulted from both the individual moral failures but even
29:13
more so the ritual uncleanness of day-today life among a falling fallen people and that needs to be cleansed. So what I'm leading up to
29:24
here the context is Yam Kapor. Let's go back to this concept of contagion. All right. So, here's the pattern. We've done this so many times.
29:36
I'm going to do it miniature this time. right? And if you're still struggling with this, just read the scripture and pray
29:49
and hopefully we'll come to the same conclusion. Um, but I I think I've said enough not to not to keep going on. the idea of a people living in the presence
30:00
of God. That's that's really what it's all about. God is dwelling in the midst of his people and his people are dwelling in his presence. But he is a holy God whose eyes are too pure to even
30:11
look upon iniquity. And they are a people of unclean lips dwelling among a people of unclean lips. So you have uncleanness dwelling with holiness.
30:21
That's all That's all grace. and and the sa the sanctuary made by human hands. Solomon will later say God doesn't dwell and then Paul will say it in in the area. God doesn't dwell in
30:35
in human temples. You know, he's he's omn omnipotent and and he's um omnipresent is what I was looking for. And so, it's still human hands.
30:46
It's still a human sanctuary. That's what the writer of Hebrews is pointing out. The uncleanness that we read about in these chapters as I said before it it
30:56
it it operates at a distance and after a year's time the sanctuary itself needs to be cleansed.
31:08
That's Yam That's Yam Kapor. Okay, everybody okay with that conceptually? You understand the concept even if you don't agree with it? Okay,
31:19
fair enough. Because well, we we've had several discussions about how it is that that sin can operate at a distance and how it is God
31:29
could continue to dwell in a sanctuary if it's no longer clean. U and you know, my my analogy was he dwells within our bodies. He's the Holy Spirit dwells within us and we're not clean. You know,
31:43
the sin still dwells in our members. the the presence of God in the sanctuary was itself entirely gracious. It was not
31:53
because Moses because Moses somehow created a an actually physically holy place on earth. He didn't. He made a place according to the
32:05
pattern he received on the mount. There's that obedience that Aaron mentioned. And God graciously caused his name to dwell there. And just like the blood of the animals,
32:17
there was nothing inherently holy about either the tabernacle or the temple later if God and that's proven by the second temple where God did not choose to cause
32:29
his name to dwell. Right? The only thing that makes the temple holy is the presence of God within and that's
32:39
entirely by entirely by grace. Okay. So the the the basic disagreement is just how does sin operate? Okay. How is it that the sanctuary can get unclean? Well, we
32:52
don't really know the mechanism. I'm not sure I really really know the mechanism of gravity either. But it's real. And we know that it's real because one day a year that place needed to be cleansed
33:03
with blood. Okay. So we know that it must have gotten defiled because it needs to be cleansed. Okay. Well, we're now taking a huge
33:15
jump. We're now going from the sanctuary made by human hands to one that wasn't made by human hands. Well, which one's
33:34
was patterned. Yes. We're going to the prototype. We're going to the original, right? Okay. Okay. So let's let's follow uh I'm not going to get into to the really a lot of detail but okay. So um
34:15
in with blood and he cleansed it. Well, now the the writer of Hebrews is saying that's exactly what Jesus
34:25
did only not with the blood of bulls. He didn't need to have bulls because he had no sin. So he didn't have to offer for himself. The writer makes that clear in
34:35
I think in chapter 7. But with the not with the bull the blood of goats either, but rather with his own blood. And he didn't enter into the human built
34:45
sanctuary. He entered into the heavenly one as as Aaron said, the one after which the earthly one was patterned. Well, there's an implication
34:56
there. And the implication is that the that Jesus did exactly what the high priest was priest was doing only he did it with perfect
35:07
blood that did not have to be shed for himself because he was sinless. That's the operational the operational comparison. But he also did it in a completely different sanctuary.
35:19
Now, if if we infer that the earthly sanctuary was over the course of a year progressively defiled by the uncleanness of the people
35:32
of Israel, so that the high priest had to take blood in to cleanse it. Then by that inference and parallel, the heavenly sanctuary is also
35:45
needing to be cleansed. Because that's what Jesus did. Only he did it with his own blood.
36:27
9:23. Let me let me read it so that everybody can hear because that Thank you. That's exactly where we were going. All right. Therefore, this is the parallel that I'm saying the writer of Hebrews is making. Okay. Therefore, it was necessary for the copies of these
36:39
things in the heavens to be cleansed with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. There it
36:51
is. They were both cleansed. And in fact, I would say that the earthly model was given to
37:03
us to show that the heavenly one needed cleansing. Now, the reason we have a problem with this is because we
37:13
associate heaven with God. You have to remember God is omnipresent. He dwells in the heavens above and he dwells on earth below. There's no place where he isn't.
37:25
Heaven is the abode of heavenly creatures. Has there ever been any sin among the heavenly creatures? Yes. And where did it
37:36
occur? In heaven. There was war in heaven, wasn't there?
37:56
Yeah. the accuser of the stood accusing
38:06
the male child to rule the nations he was cast down right I'm seeing the speech accusing and the
38:23
remerop it is appropriate and I think this is something This analogy or this this parallel that I'm point that the writer of Hebrews is pointing out is something that has been uniformly lost in Christian teaching for for millennia
38:35
because we think we think of sin we think of salvation we think of everything here on earth and yet when we read the Bible we realize there's a whole lot more than just here on earth
38:47
in Ephesians it says that Paul wasing
39:06
Christy created all things that wisdom of God might now be made known. Not here. And and where and where are we seated now? Ephesians 2, we're seated in
39:16
the heavenlies and we received all spiritual blessing in the heavenlies. I guess what what I'm what I'm saying here is that that to understand fully Yam Kapor and its fulfillment in Jesus
39:26
Christ, we have to understand the heavenlies and not just the earthlings.
39:42
Yeah. That we will judge angels. Yeah. Right. For what? Yes. Obviously for their transgressions. Um, you know, so we we do know that sin happened in heaven, but we tend to separate them and we don't understand. We we tend we've
39:53
been taught so much that Jesus is the redeemer of mankind and he most certainly is, but we we lose sight of the fact he's also the restorer of all
40:03
creation. And so when we look at Yam Kapor in order to understand both the Yam the Yahweh goat and the Aazel goat, we need to spend time in Hebrews 9 and realize
40:15
that Jesus did exactly what the high priest did. Only he did it perfectly with perfect blood and he did it in the heavenly sanctuary, not in the pattern made by man. which is why we don't need
40:26
another tab another tab temple. That all that for which the temple stood started with the tabernacle by the by the way was done by Jesus in his blood. And
40:38
so to go back to another temple would be horrible. Not just because of the sacrifices and all of that, but what it would say about Jesus's work would would very be it would be
40:49
blasphemous to say that Jesus's work was not complete. it wasn't enough. And so we have to we have to rebuild the model even
41:01
model even though the prototype the real thing is now cleansed by the blood of Jesus Christ. And I think we understand that that's not valid. But I think we do need
41:13
to meditate and realize that when Paul, for example, in Romans 1 and then in Romans 8, he talks about all creation groaning, waiting for the revelation of the sons of God. We're waiting for the
41:24
revelation of us. And that includes the heavenlies, the powers and principalities and all of those things that the the two realms are not so far
41:35
apart. I'm not saying that we should try to delve into that realm. That's not taught in scripture. In fact, many times it's forbidden. You you don't mess around with that. You know, even Michael
41:47
would not would not issue a judgment against Satan, but said, "The Lord rebuke you." You you don't mess around. You don't act like you could take on Satan or, you know, you have control over that. That's kind of that
41:58
charismatic mania that is not healthy and it's not biblical. But we also don't take the the more conservative view that you know what, I don't even think about that stuff. God takes care of that
42:10
stuff. Well, yes, he does. But we really aren't worshiping in worshiping in truth if we don't give to Jesus all the
42:22
glory that he has earned. And that means not only what he has done to redeem mankind, but what he has done to cleanse
42:33
the heavenly sanctuary from the contagion caused by both human corruption and angelic corruption. He's he's done it all is
42:46
what we're getting at here. Okay. So Yam Kapor uncleanness in the earthly sanctuary. So
43:12
sanctuary. I think that the writer of Hebrews is making this parallel very explicitly. I I don't think it can be in any way minimized that Jesus's work on the cross
43:25
was the exact parallel of the high priests but on a infinitely higher level. So that everything the high priest was to do and what he
43:37
accomplished every accomplished every year Jesus accomplished once for all with his blood. but he did it in a different place. And so the the the idea of of
43:50
temporal re redemption, we realize it's once for all. It doesn't have to be repeated. But do we understand the spatial element that it's not just the camp, it's the cosmos.
44:10
but the heavens. Yeah. I not only shake the earth, but the heavens in the biblical point of view. and and and especially some of the major prophets like uh Jeremiah and Isaiah oh and Ezekiel um the separation between heaven
44:21
and earth was not nearly as distinct as we've made it in the modern era. Okay. And this has some we've talked about the influence of the enlightenment and rationalism and there's no doubt that has something to play here that we we've
44:33
kind of we've kind of partitioned the idea of the spiritual realm and the heavenly realm and we've kind of put it out of our minds and we focus we focus mostly on what God has done to redeem
44:46
mankind particularly me you know and then that's what we think about where where am I going to do go when I die that sort of thing but we you know when we read something like This is like, no, this is bigger than that. And hopefully
44:58
when you realize that, you start to see that elsewhere, like in Ephesians or in Romans, you start to see that the work of Jesus Christ was a whole lot bigger than just saving you and me from our
45:09
sins. As great as that is, if that's the limit of our understanding, then that is the limit of our adoration and worship. And that's too small a limit. Okay. But
45:23
what is this compared to Yam Kapor? What Jesus did here compared to Yam Kapor? Well, without a doubt, this is the
45:33
goat, right? This is the goat that was sacrificed whose blood was taken into the sanctuary. Okay? This is not the Aazelle goat. In fact, there's nothing
45:44
in Hebrews that leads us to the Aazelle goat. So, this whole thing right here is is again the Yahweh goat.
45:56
And even though the phrase goat is the word goat is not used, what else can it be? I mean, it's it's like you you you you've quacked. You've waddled. You know, you're a duck.
46:07
You've done everything possible to describe the Yahweh goat except say Yahweh goat. Okay, we're in we're in Yamapour. The high priest is taking the blood of of cle of cleansing into the
46:20
sanctuary. That's the Yahweh goat. Where's the Aazelle goat? Well, that that's where it gets difficult. And I'm going to present it
46:33
um as I see
46:45
it in a two-fold manner. Okay. So the second principle here, second point, Jesus as the
47:05
goat. Again with the caveat that there is no explicit statement in the New Testament linking Jesus to the scape what we call the scapegoat. And yet historical Christianity has always maintained that
47:17
Jesus is the scapegoat. And because much of that teaching has been uh discordant and not uniform or in agreement, I think we're forced to
47:29
consider in what manner did Jesus fulfill the other goat. Keep in mind that these two goats were essentially twins.
47:42
Not not really biologically twins, but they had to be identical in ritual cleanness because as I said last week, you didn't know until the last moment
47:53
after you've presented them to the Lord, you didn't know which one was going to be sacrificed and its blood taken into the sanctuary. So, both of them had to be worthy of that because either of them
48:05
might to to either of them, it might have fallen to be the Yahweh goat. And so there is a very close union between these two goats. It's not like again
48:16
it's not the image and we have to make sure this is the Greek image not the biblical image and that is one pure strong healthy male goat and one scraggly limping lame lepous goat. No,
48:30
you had two strong worthy goats and they were indistinguishable from the sacrificial and ritual perspective. So in what way then? So it's like you
48:42
had and this is how the rabbis did view it. It's like you had one goat that was then by lot divided into
48:52
two. One offered to the Lord, the other taken out to Aazelle. Does it have anything to do with
49:11
No, because I I would I don't think that that Well, let me go back. Maybe uh it depends on whether you think the Azel goat was actually cursed.
49:24
Yes, but there was no curse there. I mean, there was no judgment. There was no words of judgment or cursing put on that. So yes, the sins were put on, but the phrase to
49:37
bear does not in in the Hebrew and and I can get into a lot of detail of this, but it does it does not necessarily change the nature of the
49:48
bearer. It can mean to to carry simply like to carry away. And most Hebrew scholars, Jewish scholars believe that is the sense of
49:59
the scapegoat, that it was a vessel of transportation. Does that make sense?
50:20
well yes it's definitely a vessel of wrath but not not inherently a vessel of wrath as for example Satan is or as all those who are outside of Christ. They they are inherently
50:33
deserving of the wrath of God. The phrase bearing sin does not necessarily change the nature of the bearer. Those and and this is I'm
50:44
there's a little bit of a rabbit trail where Leviticus talks about bearing one's guilt. It is because you have already incurred that guilt and refuse to be
50:57
purified. You bear your guilt. Does that make sense? You bear your guilt because it's your guilt and you refuse to have it lifted from you through the
51:07
purification ritual. Okay? We'll see that in Leviticus 17 again. for others to bear. Well, we can use the example of Jesus. Jesus became sin. He bore our
51:20
sins. Isaiah 53. He bore our iniquities. Did he ever become a sinner? No. He carried our sins in that sense.
51:32
He he did not carry them because they were any sense his. Right? So there's kind of the supreme example of the two meanings of
51:42
bearing. And so a most Hebrew scholars say that the goat that carried or bore the sins of the camp out into the wilderness did not itself become an
51:54
object of wrath, but rather as I mentioned last week, bore the sins of the congregation out to the place of reservation. Okay? And we we touched
52:06
upon that briefly last week that that that the Jude talks about the the fallen angels are being reserved for judgment. Uh first Peter Mark talked uh used or
52:18
quoted this verse that um their their doom has been foretold or prepared ahead of time. We we understand that that um those who have fallen both in the
52:30
angelic and in the human realm have not yet received the full condemnation of the wrath of God. They are being held in reservation for that
52:41
judgment. And in a sense that's what aazel means. It's a place of reservation. It is certainly not a place of sacrifice. of sacrifice. And so in in what sense does then does
52:55
Jesus actually or or does the Yamapore um ritual including the Azadel goat parallel with the passion of Christ?
53:06
Well, the first
53:19
way is historical. Now I need to explain that. So don't jump to con conclusions
53:29
yet. This is not to say that the second one is not historical. What happened on Goltha was historical. It happened. And what happened as a result of Christ shedding his blood in the sense of being the
53:40
aazel goat also actually happened historically. What I mean by historical is recorded. is recorded. that we read about something
53:52
historically related to the passion of Jesus Christ that fits the pattern of the Aazelle the Aazelle goat and very simply it's that two men
54:04
are standing before the judge condemned to death one of them is released the other is killed now that is a narrative that is
54:17
recorded in all four gospels and has no meaning outside of the parallel with Yam
54:31
Kapor. Barabus does not show up before the passion and we don't read anything about him about him afterward. It's just there. Have you ever wondered why it's
54:43
there? I never really wondered why it's there until I started studying the Azel goat and realizing with the help of some other authors that wow this looks a whole lot like what happened before
54:57
pilot. Now you look at it and say okay well they weren't they were by no means equal. Well no they weren't but in a sense yes they
55:12
were. Barabus' crime was multipplex. In fact, each gospel writer associates him with a different crime. U the one crime though that that seems to be most consistent and and especially in extra
55:23
biblical writing is insurrectionist. What he did he did against the Roman emperor and the Roman Empire. He was an
55:41
be? He was claimed to be an insurrectionist, right? He was proclaiming a different king than king than Caesar. In a sense, the two men were
55:51
standing trial for the same theoretical crime, which in both cases or in either case was a capital offense in the Roman
56:02
Empire. So historically speaking and just plain what happened on that day during the passion when Christ was brought before
56:13
Pilate. Two Pilate. Two men, one set free. He was not scorched. We don't read of any of any punishment. We don't read that he was
56:24
then taken out and thrown off a cliff with a rock tied around his horns. I mean his neck. We don't read of anything about Barabus except he was set free, right? Which is exactly what happens in
56:36
Leviticus 16 to the Yazelle goat. Regardless of what rabbitic accretions came later, the only thing that we read in Leviticus 16 is that it's taken out and set free, released. Barabus is
56:50
released. The other one is sacrificed. Jesus is sacrificed. Okay. So in answer to the historical fulfillment of Yam Kapor, I think it
57:02
points to right? Is that how you spell it or is it two Rs and one
57:25
B? But I don't know about you, u I don't find that satisfying. because I cannot conceive a way of a way that Barabas carried our sins anywhere. Now there is a very
57:35
interesting statement in Matthew or is it in Luke? It's not in
57:49
interesting statement where the Pharisees cry out, "His blood be upon our heads and the heads of
58:00
our children." Now, I don't know exactly how that relates to Barabus. I do think it directly relates to AD70. Um, I think that prophecy was very
58:11
much fulfilled. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. But it it it touches upon the bearing of the iniquities. His his blood be on our head. Anna
58:40
cookies. Actually, we're going to go to Ephesians 4, but 1 Peter 3 is is parallel. Um, that's the second that's the second one. And I think I hope that everything that we've talked about
58:51
throughout the whole geography of holiness will will point to this second means by which Jesus is the aazelle
59:03
goat. Why would God orchestrate a visible fulfillment of the Azazel
59:19
goat? Anybody have a theory? I mean, I I I can't even prove that Barabus was that historical fulfillment. I simply am saying that there's really no other reason for that narrative to be in our
59:29
Bibles on that particular day and with that particular event that the writer of Hebrews clearly associates with Yam Kapor unless Barabus was in some sense
59:40
the scapegoat the goat who escapes. I mean, I was kind of thinking like there's no way you can