Chapter 24

1 The oil for the lamps. 5 The shewbread. 10 Shelomith’s son blasphemeth. 13 The law of blasphemy. 17 Of murder. 18 Of damage. 23 The blasphemer is stoned.

2. Pure oil olive. The instruction here given in regard to oil for the lamps of the candlestick is the same as that recorded in Ex. 27:20, 21. The oil was furnished by the congregation, as was also the flour for the shewbread and the loaves of the Feast of Weeks. Aaron was responsible for the lamps, and at first he trimmed them himself (Ex. 30:8), but later this became the work of the priests.

Ordinary oil was pressed out in an oil press, but oil for the sanctuary lamps was beaten out. The berries were carefully washed, and all impurities, leaves, and twigs removed. Then they were beaten and bruised, and the oil was allowed to seep out of itself. This produced less oil than the other method, but the result was a superior product.

Authorities do not agree as to whether the lamps burned both day and night. Verse 3 says that Aaron shall “order it from the evening unto the morning before the Lord continually,” whereas v. 2 states that the lamps are to burn continually. According to Ex. 30:8, Aaron lighted the lamps in the evening, but 1 Sam. 3:3 speaks of “the lamp of God” going out. In standard practice, however, “the lamps were never all extinguished at one time, but shed their light by day and by night” (PP 348). The various statements, while seeming to be contradictory, are thus actually harmonious. It is probable that the “lamp of God” (1 Sam. 3:3) was not the candlestick. Or it may have been that Eli was not as careful as he might have been in following the prescribed ritual. As there must always be a sacrifice on the altar and shewbread on the table, so also there must always be a lamp burning. Even in the daytime the natural light would be insufficient for the priests to perform the daily ritual, in a tent heavily covered and without windows.

5. Twelve cakes. Specific instructions are now given for the preparation and use of the shewbread, mentioned three times previously (Ex. 25:30; 35:13; 39:36). Each cake was made of 4 qt. (4.41 l.) of fine flour. Nothing is said as to whether or not the bread was to be leavened, but the fact that it was placed before the Lord in the first apartment would seem to imply that leaven was not used. Being, as it were, a continuous “meat offering” (Num. 4:7), it would come under the regulations for meat offerings, and must therefore have been made without leaven (Lev. 2:4, 11). Josephus specifically states that leaven was not used (Antiquities iii 6.6). In later times the preparation and arrangement of the cakes were considered the work of the Levites (1 Chron. 9:32).

6. Two rows. That is, piles. The word means an orderly arrangement of any kind (see Judges 6:26, margin). The size of the loaves would require stacking rather than arrangement in “rows.”

7. Frankincense. This was placed in two golden cups, and when the bread was removed the incense was burned on coals of fire as an offering to the Lord.

8. Every sabbath. The shewbread was removed weekly upon the Sabbath day by four priests, according to the Talmud, two to take out the loaves and two to take out the incense cups. As they were ready to remove the loaves and the incense cups, four other priests, of the new course for the coming week, entered, carrying the new bread and the new incense cups. Those who brought in the new bread stood at the north side, facing south; those who took away the old bread stood at the south side, facing north. As the priest on one side removed the loaves, the priest opposite him put the new on. In doing this they were careful not to take away the old till the new was ready to be put in place. Thus, bread was always on the table. The old bread was then eaten by the priests as theirportion, within the sacred precincts of the sanctuary. It was this bread that Abimelech gave to David and his men (1 Sam. 21:4–6; Matt. 12:3, 4).

This is often called the “bread of the Presence,” and typified Christ, the true Bread of Life (see John 6:51). The bread testified also to Israel’s constant dependence on God for all their needs, both spiritual and temporal (see Matt. 6:31–34). The table was always set, and its supply of bread renewed week by week. As the flame in the lamps on the candlestick rose heavenward, so the incense on the table of shewbread ascended as a sweet savor to the Giver of all good things.

It is but a short step from the table of the Lord in the sanctuary to the table of the Lord in the NT. The priests partook of the bread representative of Him who came down from heaven; we eat of the bread Christ says is His body (1 Cor. 11:24).

10. The son of an Israelitish woman. The fact that the young man was the son of an Egyptian, and that he “went out among the children of Israel,” indicates that he was not allowed within the camp proper, but entered nevertheless. Here a quarrel arose, and the young man blasphemed the name of the Lord. Since he did not belong in the camp but was counted a stranger, he was put in ward until the will of the Lord could be ascertained, that is, until they could learn how the laws of Israel applied to one who was at least in part a stranger. When he entered the camp in the first place, it had been his purpose to pitch his tent there (PP 407).

11. Blasphemed. Instead of repenting, he proved to be perversely impenitent.

22. One manner of law. The incident mentioned in vs. 10–14 gave occasion for a clarification of certain civil laws, particularly as they applied to “the stranger” (see Ex. 21:12, 24, 33). God forgives sin whatever it be, but civil crimes cannot be settled on this basis. Israel was a nation as well as a church, and God gave rules for both. If one man kills another, God in mercy will forgive him, when he repents. In fact, whatever sin a man may commit, be it ever so heinous, he is still eligible for God’s abundant mercy. God knows the heart, and hence can forgive, and even forget. But if penalty were suspended whenever a man repents, every criminal would claim repentance and save himself from the gallows! If it became known that penalty was remitted upon repentance, all prisons would soon be emptied!

Some forget that though God forgives, He does not often remove the penalty for transgression. David may sin and repent; but he does not escape the result of his sin. He suffers so long as he lives. A man transgresses the rules of life, and whatever the transgression, however deeply he has sinned, God can and will forgive. But only under most unusual circumstances does the man escape the natural consequences of what he has done. He is forgiven, but usually he also suffers for his misdeeds.

Government “is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil” (Rom. 13:4). Civil law has its place.

Therefore God’s requirement of “eye for eye, tooth for tooth” is not something to be lightly disposed of as an OT ordinance. It is on this principle that government today is founded. If there were no punishment for evil, conditions would be even worse than they are now. “Rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power?” (Rom. 13:3).

But if there is to be punishment for evil, how shall that punishment be decided? The answer is that the punishment should fit the crime. Hence, “he that killeth a beast shall make it good; beast for beast.” This seems eminently fair. This is justice and equity.

Ellen G. White comments

5-9PP 348

10, 11 PP 407

10-16PP 408

20 MB 109