The Sabbath Breaker, and the Rebellion of Korah
“And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses.”
Numb. xvi. 32, 33
“‘■ And the earth opened her mouth and swallowed them up, and their houses, and all the men that appertained unto Korah, and all their goods.
“They, and all that appertained to them, went down alive into the pit, and the earth closed upon them; and they perished from among the congregation.”
The children of Israel are still at Rithmah on the borders of Canaan, where the unhappy events recorded in our text took place.. We reg-ard in them a two- fold subject of consideration. The inviolability first of the law, and secondly of the priesthood.
The severity and inviolable nature of the law, appears from the history of the Sabbath breaker. The case was as follows. A man went about in the camp, one Sabbath day, and gathered up some wood. This was the crime. But although he might not be justified in doing so, yet many things doubtless might have been said in his excuse, by which his crime might have been palliated. He was permitted to gather’ wood, but he did so on the Sabbath. He doubtless knew, that God had forbidden every species of labour on that day, at least he might and ought to have known it. But he was ignorant that all labour was so strictly prohibited, even upon pain of death. And can gathering a few sticks be called labour? The man probably did not do it with the intention of showing that he disregarded the divine command, nor to offend others, and tempt them to evil.
But see, what an astonishing movement this apparent trifle caused in the whole camp! The people who found the man thus occupied, bring him to Moses, who calls together all the elders of the congregation on account of it, and requests their decision upon it. The thing appears of importance to them, but considering all the circumstances mentioned above, too difficult for them to pronounce a decision. They do not wish to be hasty, and therefore put the man in ward; for it was not clearly expressed in the law what should be done to him.
The Lord then took up the matter himself. And what decision did he give respecting him? Did he order him to be set at liberty with a warning to do so no more, since he had erred more from ignorance than impiety, and the gathering of a few sticks could scarcely be called labour? Or did the Lord coramand him to be kept prisoner for a few days, that he might not regard himself as innocent, although he knew not how great a sin he had committed? This, according to our views, would have been mild and merciful, if not even just. But our judgment in divine things amounts to nothing. The law knows nothing of mercy and lenity, and still less of a right to regard things less strictly. Certainly, were the morality of the present day to sit in judgment, it would declare nothing to be culpable sin, or as meriting eternal death. Suppose the question were to concern the keeping of the Lord’s day; how is it celebrated, even though the ancient strictness should by no means be applied to it, nor evangelical liberty infringed upon? By what is it distinguished from other days? Are not many customary occupations carried on, on that day, and especially in the former part of it? How much of it is also spent in idleness? People sleep longer than usual, dress better, receive and pay visits, and spend the evening in a variety of amusements and dissipation, so that even midnight resounds with the rattling of carriages, and the wild uproar. England is the only country on earth where the case is different. Profound silence and tranquillity reigns on the Sunday in London — that im-
‘i y mense city, which resembles an entire kingdom. Why ^^*^V’ ‘should not this be the case elsewhere, especially in our little valley? The reason is, because “ye will not.” You will live according to your lusts, and many are fearful of diminishing their gains, if they were to keep the day, although the- Lord says, it shall not be in vain, even if we only shut a door in his temple in honour of his commands.
But what was the sentence pronounced upon the man who gathered sticks on the Sabbath day? The Lord said to Moses, “The man shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him,” and this sentence was really executed. We see, in this single instance, the dreadful severity and strictness of” the divine law; for the same is extended to the whole of the commandments. If men think so little of transgressing them, yet God is only the more strict. He that faileth in one point is guilty of all. Reflect upon the import of these words, and what would become of us, were this rule to be acted upon in our case I Who amongst us can say, he has only transgressed in one point? And were any one to confess that, he would, according to this rule, necessarily perish. How much more he, who has repeatedly and grossly transgressed! We must give an account of every idle word; and what an account will that be! Let our hearts and thoughts dwell upon the subject, and duly consider it; for it is the word and doctrine, not of man, but of God.
But why linger at such a terrifying consideration? In order that we may duly perceive our lost and sinful state; be thoroughly conscious of the impossibility of salvation out of Christ; comprehend the necessity of the obedience of Christ in our stead; obtain a contrite spiiit and a broken heart; entirely despair of ourselves; take refuge with Jesus Christ, and thus be justified by faith in him, and become heirs of eternal life. The very reason why Christ isp so indifferent to mankind, and that on that account they perish, is, because they are not aware of their lost state. The perception of it is half the deliverance from it. Rest not, therefore, until you can say with David, “Thou
p forgavest the iniquity of my sin.” “Bless the Lord, O my soul, who forgiveth all thine iniquities!”
The history of the rebellion of Korah confirms,, in a terrific manner, the typical priesthood; against which he and his adherents opposed themselves, and as a punishment were swallowed up alive by the earth. The question concerning the offering of sacrifices and of incense, in a word, the priesthood. Moses, by divine command, had ordained his brother Aaron and his descendants to the high-priesthood, but the rest of the tribe of Levi and his own descendants to inferior priestly offices. Several were dissatisfied with this arrangement, and would not recognize it as divine; accused Moses of being imperious; asserted that others were equally fit for the priesthood; procured adherents, consisting solely of persons of rank and authority; rebelled, and refused to listen any longer to Moses, at whom they niocked and bitterly scoffed. “Is it a small thing,” said they, “that thou hast brought us up out of a land that floweth with milk and honey, to kill us in the wilderness, except thou make thyself altogether a prince over us? Moreover, thou hast not brought us into a land that floweth with milk and honey, or given us inheritance of fields and vineyards.” “Will you put out the eyes of these men?” How strange! They accuse Moses of a desire to rule, and yet practice it themselves! But the J.ord interposed in a dreadful manner. The earth opened, and the whole of the conspirators with their families went down quick into the pit. A fire also went out from the Lord, and consumed the two hundred and fifty men that offered incense; and because the people murmured, instead of humbling themselves, a plague went forth from the Lord, and slew fourteen thousand seven hundred of them.
On this, Aaron was solemnly established in the priesthood, and the Israelites rendered so tractable, that they were well satisfied with it. “Behold,” said they to Moses, “we die, we perish, we all perish. Whosoever cometh any way near unto the tabernacle of the Lord, dieth. Shall we then be utterly consumed?” The Lord then said unto Aaron, “Thou, and thy sons, and thy father’s house with thee, shall bear the iniquity of the sanctuary; and thou and thy sons with thee shall bear the iniquity of your priesthood. And ye shall keep the charge of the sanctuary and the charge of the altar, that there be no wrath any more upon the children of Israel.” (Numb, xviii. 1,5.) They were therefore compelled to be content with the typical priesthood, in order to continue in the divine favour, and did not consequently venture to encroach upon it.
We learn from this narrative a very important lesson. How much more ought we to be satisfied with the true priesthood of the Son of God, that thus we may be and cotitinue acceptable in the sight of God; and how much more ought we to beware of entirely denying it, or even encroaching upon the office of that Jesus, whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, that he might offer unto us that righteousness which avails before God, in the forgiveness of sins, which had previously remained under the divine forbearance! Of which high-priesthood the Apostle speaks at large in Heb. vii. — x.
p2
But what is implied in rejecting the priesthood of Christ, or encroaching upon it? Two things ace to be noticed here, which we will briefly consider; the priesthood of Christ, and in what respe.ct it may be rejected or encroached upon.
Jesus Christ is the true High Priest, and administers the true priesthood. He has, for the most part, perfected and finished it; by which we mean, he has redeemed us by the sacrifice of himself. He has reconciled us to God. He sanctified himself for those whom the Father had given him, that they also might be sanctified through the truth. As the Lamb of God, he has taken away the sins of the world. He was wounded by our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities. He, the righteous one, suffered for the unrighteous, and bore our sins in his own body on the tree. He is the propitiation for our sins, and with one offering has perfected for ever them that are sanctified. By this offering, which he accomplished in the deepest humiliation on the cross, he became the cause of salvation to all them that obey him. The Son of God accomplished and finished this part of his priesthood during his thirty-three years’ abode upon earth, particularly in the eighteen, six, and three last hours of his lile — in Gethsemane, before his judges, and on the cross, during the three hours of darkness. On that day, reconciliation was made for iniquity, and everlasting righteousness brought in; when the Messiah was cut off, but not for himself. (Daniel ix. 24, 26.)
The Son of God administers also a principal part of his priestly office still*; and this consists in his intercession, “for he ever liveth to make intercession for us.” Through this intercession, he accomplishes the justification of his people, and what else is requisite for their salvation, even as he accomplished it for Peter, when he prayed that his faith might not fail?
It is in the exercise of this priestly office that our whole salvation lies, from its commencement to its termination. Hence this sacrifice needs not to be repeated, and therefore this typical service in the temple soon ceased after its completion, never to be re-established.
The punishment inflicted upon Korah and his adherents for attempting- to obtain possession of the typical priesthood, may serve us also for a warning — not only against sin in the general, because of the dreadful and avenging righteousness and holiness of the divine being, but also against the rejection of the priesthood of the Son of God, and all encroachments Hpon it in particular.
How does a person become guilty of these? In two ways; the one gross, and the other more subtle. Even the names of the men who refused obedience to the typical priesthood ordained of God, contain intimations to this effect. For Abiram means the lofty self-exalting father, who is, however, only a worm; the character of ‘the proud pharisee, who exalted himself above the humble publican. Dathan signifies a man of the law. Such was the rich young ruler who came to Jesus — not as a sick man to a physician, or as a poor man to one that is rich and benevolent. A third is called On; strength and sufficiency; “What lack I yet?” What shall I do? as if it were scarcely possible that any thing could be enjoined which he was unable to fulfil. And such are the sentiments from whence proceeds the rejection of the priesthood of Christ, and of the atonement and reconciliation made by him.
Formerly, there was only a single sect — the Pelagians, and in latter times, the Socinians, who directly contested and denied the divinity of the Son of God, together with his priesthood, as well the corruption of human nature, the impossibility of being justified and saved by the law, and the necessity of the impartation of the Holy Spirit. On the contrary, they boasted of the dignity and powers of human nature, took praise to themselves for duly explaining the duties of man, which, according to their doctrine, were sufficient, if people would only practise them; conceded Jesus the honour of a mere teacher and pattern, without acknowledging that more is required in order to salvation ;* and spoke very contemptuously of faith, so far as it did not mean mere fidelity and obedience; true Dathans, moralists; 0ns, self-sufficient; and Abirams, arrogant worms. But now these errors have infected a great part of the protestant church. What value is attached, on the whole, to Christ, to his sacrifice and merits, or to the Holy Spirit? Man, say they, is a self-sufficient creature; he is whole, and needs no physician; he can easily repair and atone for his unimportant sins himself. This is the New Testamental conspiracy of Korah and his fellow rebels. However gifted and learned the heads and leaders of the party may be, we are commanded to abhor their perverted sentiments, and separate ourselves entirely from them. “Foi* if we sin wilfully after having received the knowledge of the truth, there remains no more sacrifice for sin, but a dreadful looking for of judgment, and of fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.”
But as for you, ye humble and abased souls, who know how great your sin and misery is, do not reject the priesthood of Christ and his vicarious sacrifice. If you have no righteousness of your own to show, you do not require any. But lay hold only the more humbly and ardently on the bleeding merits of your Priest. If you are compelled to feel your utter unworthiness, and are disgusted with yourselves, cleave the more to Christ crucified, who offered himself unio God as a sweet-smelling savour, by whom ye are rendered acceptable. If from being self-sufficient pharisees, you have become wretched nothings, he is able out of his fulness to make you abundantly rich. The dejection you feel at your own insufficiency, is only a subtle rejection of the priesthood of Christ, and proves your blindness with respect to it. If you understood it aright, you would feel a boldness in coming to the throne of grace through him, as the new and living way, by which free access is given us to God.
0 that the Holy Spirit, who alone is able, would open our understandings to contemplate, in the light of truth, the glorious atonement of Christ, the efficacy of his merits, and the benefits of his intercession! May he graciously prevent any of us from rejecting them by unbelief, frivolity, worldly-mindedness, and the love of sin; and, on’ the contrary, multiply the number of those who are made meet to partake of the glorious fruits of the Saviour’s sublime and wondrous work I Amen.