Leviticus 7:11–34

From verse 8 of chapter 6 to the end of Leviticus 7 we have the law of the various offerings. In each case the "law" gives more detail about how to present the offering to the Lord. It says especially how the priests were to deal with the parts that were not burned before Him.

Although the peace offering itself stands third in order, its "law" comes to us last of all. That carries meaning. No offering unfolds the communion of the worshipper as fully as the peace offering does. In the burnt offering, it is Christ offering Himself to God. In the grain offering, we have Christ's perfect humanity. In the sin offering, we learn that sin, at its root, is fully met. In the trespass offering, there is a full answer to the actual sin in the life. But none of these unfolds the communion of the worshipper. That belongs to the peace offering, and I believe that is why its law stands where it does. It comes at the close of all. It teaches us that when the soul feeds upon Christ, it must be a full Christ, seen in every aspect of His life, His character, His Person, His work, His offices.

In this chapter we learn only what happened to the blood and the fat, which was God's portion. The law of the peace offering, in Leviticus 7:11-34, tells us more. Not only the priest had his share; the offerer himself had his portion. So this offering has a mark of its own — communion with God over the excellence of the sacrifice of Christ.

So Jehovah had His portion. So did Christ, signified by the priest who presented the blood and the fat — He and His house ("we are His house"). So did the believers, one with another. All entered into and enjoyed the fellowship of Christ's work. But uncleanness and the feast on that sacrifice can never go together. If man's communion is prominent, greater care guards it, so that he does not forget what is due to God and His holiness.

If offered as a thanksgiving, it was to be offered on the same day, and no part kept. If it was a vow or voluntary offering, the rest might be eaten the next day. We find the same two measures in worship now. Both are real, but they do not hold the same power. Some souls are happy in the sense of what the Lord has done for them, and they break out in grateful thanks. That may be elementary, but it is real worship of God. Yet it lacks the power that sustains. In the vow we see more. There it is not simply what has been done for us, but the heart delights in what Christ is Himself before God. This abides.

Yet in the peace offering for thanksgiving, leaven was not only allowed but required. Divine wisdom was providing for man and his fellowship. This was believing man, set apart for God. Still it took account of his nature. There was that in him which was not in Christ. In what represented Him leaven was not and could not be. But what represented the saints and their fellowship had to show the corruption of nature. Otherwise the picture would not be true.

In the peace offering, the fat was burnt on the altar as a sacrifice to God. If anyone ate the flesh of the victim on a day too far from that one, it was not communion but sin. The worshipper showed his joy by eating the sacrifice. That joy had to stay in immediate connection with the offering made to God. Otherwise it was profane.

The term "peace offering" conveys a wrong thought about the sacrifice spoken of in the Scriptures we have just read. Many people take it for granted that this offering pictures Christ making our peace with God. But that is not a correct thought. The peace offering is rather an offering of thanksgiving or praise. The peace offering pictures our communion, as saints of God, on the ground of the value of the work and precious blood of Christ before God — our communion with God Himself, our communion with the Lord Jesus, and our communion with one another as priests of God... That is why we have that expression, "If he offer it for a thanksgiving." Praise and worship necessarily flow from communion.

...the name would be better understood if translated requitals, or recompenses, which is what the Hebrew word Shelamim means. As the reader may see in Leviticus 7:12, 16, people brought it on private occasions, either for a vow or for a sacrifice of thanksgiving. It really has nothing to do with the idea of peace.

In this chapter, the peace offering for a thanksgiving is the only offering that carried a meal offering along with it. The impression is this. We come to God with appreciation and thankfulness for all that is being done for us. In doing so we must keep in mind not only the death of Christ, but also that perfect life leading up to it.

The offering "for a thanksgiving" had to come with a meal offering. The "unleavened cakes mingled with oil" picture the perfect man Christ Jesus, conceived by the Holy Spirit. The "unleavened wafers anointed with oil" remind us of that blessed One who was anointed with the Holy Spirit. The cakes mingled with oil and fine flour fried set Him before us in His sufferings. Notice so far the complete absence of leaven, because it may express the perfect purity of the humanity of Christ.

In the New Translation we find another feature introduced; the word "fried" (v. 12) is translated "saturated" with oil. Every movement our Lord made when in this world, and every word He spoke, were all in the power of the Holy Spirit. It is this blessed Person, our Lord Jesus Christ, who has brought us into fellowship with God as the result of His death.

No one can know communion with God apart from a real recognition of the death of Christ for us, because the offerer laid his hand on the victim's head before he killed it. But if the Lord has died, He first lived. So the unleavened cakes pictured His life as well as His death. Yet the order is suggestive. His death comes first here, then His life; the cakes were offered with the sacrifice of thanksgiving — literally, on it.

Divine wisdom was providing for man and his fellowship. It was man believing and holy. Still it took account of his nature. There was that in him which was not in Christ. In what represented Him there was no leaven, and there could be none. But whatever represented the saints and their fellowship had to show the corruption of nature, or the picture would not ring true... Christ has, and loves to have, His part in our thanksgiving — He without whom we could have none.

This is all the more striking. Every Israelite began the holy year with the Passover, where God banned leaven in every form. The ban covered the meal offering too, in pointed terms, as the chapter given to it makes plain. Yet in the peace offering for thanksgiving, as in the two loaves of the Feast of Weeks, leaven was not only allowed but prescribed. And the reason in each case was the same. Divine wisdom was providing for man and his fellowship. This was man as a believer, and holy. Still it took account of his nature. There was that in him which was not in Christ.

Notice that up to this point there is no leaven at all. That was to express the perfect purity of the humanity of Christ. Then, besides these things, "he shall bring his offering with loaves of leavened bread." And why do we now have leaven? Surely not to express what Christ was, but what we are. Even in our thanksgivings to God our Father, we still have that in us — the flesh — in which nothing good dwells.

God permitted leaven here — and in Scripture leaven is always a symbol of evil — but it had to stay under careful control. There is no leaven in verse 12, which speaks of Christ Himself. No suggestion of evil can ever attach to Him. But leaven does appear in verse 13, which brings us, the offerers, into the picture. Even there, it had to stay under control. Nothing suggests the leaven is active. It has been in the oven and baked — fire has judged it in the presence of God.

In addition, the offerer was to bring leavened bread. The whole formed one offering, though its foundation was the animal sacrifice. On that lay, as it were, the unleavened cakes and wafers, and on them the leavened bread. Of all this, only the appointed part of the animal burned on the altar, and the serving priest received a heave offering of the cakes and bread.

One portion out of the whole, or out of each offering, was to go to Jehovah as a heave offering, and it fell to the priest who sprinkled the blood, as his portion. Christ has, and loves to have, His part in our thanksgiving — He without Whom we could have none.

But if it is a question of OUR offering a thanksgiving sacrifice, the leaven simply admits this: in OUR offering there may be ignorance, self-satisfaction, pride, a lack of proper reverence, even rivalry. It is painful to hear faulty or mistaken things said in thanksgiving. It is painful to see a brother stand for a worship hymn with his hand in his pocket, or sit in a careless, lounging way.

The rules for the peace offering pictured the communion of God with His people. Under them the offerer could bring both unleavened cakes and leavened bread to Jehovah. The first set out Christ in His perfect, spotless purity. The second set out the worshipper. He had an evil nature, and in the sacrifice and death of Christ that nature had passed under the fire of God's judgment. God accepted both.

The heave-offering included the right shoulder of the peace-offering (except in the case of the Nazirite). It also included one out of the whole offering that went with the animal offered as a peace-offering (Lev. 7:11-14); the first of the dough (Num. 15:20), and the tithes (Num. 18:24)… These offerings differ from one another, yet they have one feature in common. They are all portions taken out of a larger whole, whether of fruits, of animals, of money, or of land, and as such are called heave-offerings.

In the peace offering for thanksgiving, leaven was not only allowed but commanded. The same was true of the two loaves of the Feast of Weeks… Divine wisdom was providing for man and his fellowship. It was man believing and holy. Still it took account of his nature. There was that in him which was not in Christ. In what represented Him leaven was not, nor could be. But what represented the saints and their fellowship had to show the corruption of nature. Without that, the picture would not be true.

The first set out Christ in His perfect spotless purity. The second set out the worshipper, who had an evil nature. In the sacrifice and death of Christ, that nature had passed under the fire of God's judgment. God accepted both.

"Leaven" was permitted, because there was sin in the worshipper's nature. "Uncleanness" was forbidden, because there should be no sin on the worshipper's conscience. If sin is in question, communion must be out of the question. God has met and provided for the sin which He knows to be in us, by the blood of atonement. In other words, the "blood" of the sacrifice fully met the "leaven" in the worshipper's nature. The priest who eats the leavened bread must be the one who sprinkles the blood. God has put our sin out of His sight for ever. Though it is in us, it is not the object on which His eye rests. He sees only the blood. And therefore He can go on with us, and allow us the freest fellowship with Him. But if we let the "sin" that is in us grow into "sins," there must be confession, forgiveness, and cleansing. Only then can we eat of the flesh of the peace offering again.

Christ has, and loves to have, His part in our thanksgiving — He without whom we could have none.

The offering priest is a type of the Lord Jesus, who offered Himself without spot to God. He must have His part in all this blessed communion and joy and worship, because it has all come about through Him.

God finds a savour of rest in the part offered to Him. The priest who sprinkled the blood, a picture of the Priest in heaven, had his part. Aaron and his sons, a shadow of the Church, had their part. The offerer and his friends also fed on the same offering… What nearness to the Father, what joy, what thanksgiving, what worship must be bound up with this sharing together in that one Object which has so perfectly pleased and satisfied God!

The blood is sprinkled, and the fat burned as a sweet aroma; the wave-breast was for Aaron and his sons, the heave-shoulder for the priest who offered it; and the rest for the worshipper to feed on, as an occasion of joy and thanksgiving before Jehovah... Here Christ is shown not only as the perfect burnt offering, given up entirely to God in death for His glory, but also as an offering we feed on. He is not only God's delight; He is also what we can share in with Him. He is the subject matter of communion... The communion is between all the saints: the worshipper, the priest, and God.

That is to say, the worshipper's communion must never be cut off from the sacrifice it rests on. Worship and communion stay fresh and acceptable as long as a person has spiritual energy to keep that connection alive — and no longer. We must keep close to the sacrifice: in the way we think, in what our hearts love, and in what our souls experience.

But if the sacrifice of this offering was a vow or a voluntary offering, the flesh might be eaten not only on the day it was presented, but the rest of it on the next day as well... Thanksgiving is simple, and God looks for it from the simplest believer. But it does not have the sustaining power of that devoted heart which a deeper knowledge of Christ and His sacrifice creates in some who know God's grace better.

The worshipper must eat his portion in connection with the burnt offering and the priests' portion. If he eats it apart from these, it becomes an abomination, and the soul that eats it must bear his iniquity... So we shall find again and again that joy in the Lord easily sinks into what is merely natural. For example, Christians come with glad hearts to seek the Lord in communion, and the Spirit is present. They forget all their grief... But if they are not very watchful, their joy degenerates. It outlasts what is spiritual, and becomes joy in the flesh. The real test and power of this is its connection with the sacrifice offered.

If any worship or praise to God is not connected with the value of the work of His Son, it is simply an abomination in His sight. In other words, God does not accept as worshippers people who have never been washed in the precious blood of Christ. There is nothing God is so jealous about as the way people worship Him. Yet that is usually the last thing Christians think about.

The peace offering of a thanksgiving is singled out also... to insist that the offerer had to bring it of his own free will, eat it the same day he offered it, and leave none of it overnight. This is repeated from Leviticus 7:15. Just as God's mercies are "new every morning" (Lam. 3:22-23), so our occasions of thanksgiving should be always new and fresh.

It is an offering of repayment, or recompense, so a man might bring it to express thanksgiving, or as a vow, or as a voluntary offering. If the offerer brought it for thanksgiving, he and those with him could eat it only on the day he offered it. If he brought it as a vow or a voluntary offering, he could feed on it for two days, but never on the third... A vow or a freewill offering spoke of something surrendered to God, whether for a time or forever. Thanksgiving spoke only of gratitude for something already received.

Then we learn that a vow or voluntary offering has greater power than a simple return of thanks for blessings received, however good and right that thanks is. The vow stands for devotedness of heart in the offerer... But if the offering had devotedness or spontaneity, there was a sustaining power that lasted.

When the Lord's own hand sends someone a marked favour, the soul rises at once in thanksgiving. The worship then comes from that favour or mercy, whatever it happens to be, and stays tied to it, and there it ends. But when the Holy Spirit leads the heart out in some voluntary or deliberate expression of praise, that praise lasts longer.

The Lord Jesus has plainly forbidden us to make vows today (Matt. 5:33-37), for the law of God has proved that man in the flesh cannot be trusted, and we cannot promise what we will do in the future. Yet the vow would no doubt speak of the purpose of heart to devote oneself to the Lord in obedient faith. This is right, but not an actual vow.

A "vow" has to do with some act of devotion. It means a definite committal to God to carry out some work for His glory and for the blessing of His people... If someone sees a need and takes it up in communion with God, asking grace to be devoted to the service involved, you would see the features of a "vow" peace offering. It is not required, but it is a privilege open to anyone who really wants to commit himself to God, so that God can use him.

But no peace offering could be eaten for more than two days. The reason: if the offerer and the friends he invited kept living on it day after day, it would look like a person killing an animal for his own feast, instead of bringing an offering to the LORD.

The offering had to be eaten the same day, or at the latest on the second day; no one could keep it longer. This shows that the communion must be spiritual. We can only have it in communion with the sacrifice of Christ, not in nature... For instance, if Christians in gladness of heart come to seek the Lord in communion, the Spirit is present; they forget all grief... but if they are not very watchful, their joy degenerates. It lasts beyond what is spiritual, and becomes joy in the flesh. The real test and power of this is its connection with the sacrifice offered.

In chapter 7 we find that the worshipper ate the rest of the peace offering, except the breast and the shoulder, which belonged to the priests... The blood is sprinkled, and the fat burned as a pleasing aroma. The breast was for Aaron and his sons, the shoulder for the priest who offered it, and the rest was for the worshipper to feed on, as an occasion of joy and thanksgiving before Jehovah... Christ is shown here not only as the perfect burnt offering, wholly given up to God in death for His glory, but also as an offering we feed on. He is not only God's delight; He is also what we can share with God. He is the subject matter of communion... The communion is between all saints, the worshipper, the priest, and God.

Then we learn the greater power of a vow or voluntary offering, which stands for devotion of heart in the one who offers, over a simple return of thanks for blessings received, however good and right that is. For the thanksgiving, the flesh had to be eaten the same day as the sacrifice... Where there was devotion or spontaneity, there was a power that lasted. The flesh was to be eaten that day, and what was left could also be eaten the next day... God would not allow the worshipper to be cut off from the sacrifice beyond the second day. Fellowship in joy and peace is encouraged, especially where Christ draws and fills the heart in the power of His sacrifice; but the feast must not be carried too far from its source.

This shows how carefully God guarded communion. He kept it to Himself and to those who could have communion with Him. So no one was to use any leftover part, or put it to ordinary use; it had to be burned. We see the same principle elsewhere... God gave the same strict instruction about the Passover lamb: anything left of it until the morning had to be burned (Ex. 12:10).

No one could feed on a peace offering for more than two days. If the man who brought it, and the friends he invited, went on living off it day after day, it would look like a person killing an animal for his own feast, instead of bringing an offering to the LORD.

The third day is also stamped with the divine mark of resurrection by the prophet Hosea: "After two days He will revive us; on the third day He will raise us up, that we may live before Him." And of the peace offering we read, "what remains of the flesh of the sacrifice on the third day shall be burned up with fire." That is, on the third day it belongs wholly to God.

Communion cannot be stretched beyond the measure of spiritual power. Any effort to keep up a show of communion by our own strength is "an abomination" in the sight of God.

The communion of the worshipper must never be separated from the sacrifice on which that communion is founded... We may begin some act or expression of worship with our hearts taken up with Christ. Before we reach the end, we may become taken up with what we are doing or saying, or with the people listening to us... If the Holy Spirit produces "five words" of worship or thanksgiving, let us say the five and stop.

Nothing is of any value, in the judgement of God, which is not immediately connected with Christ. There may be a great deal of what looks like worship, which is, after all, the mere excitement and outflow of natural feeling. There may be much apparent devotion which is merely fleshly pietism.

With a voluntary offering the communion lasts longer; it might be eaten for two days. But no peace offering could be fed on for more than two days. If the offerer and the friends he invited kept living on it day after day, it would look like a person killing an animal for his own feast, rather than bringing an offering to the LORD. Besides, we have no doubt that the third day in Scripture often refers to resurrection.

Why was this? Because keeping it broke the link between the eating and the sacrifice on the altar. So in Leviticus 3:5: "Aaron's sons shall burn it on the altar on top of the burnt offering" — that is to say, the burnt offering is the foundation of the peace offering. This eating of the sacrifice, then, was not like ordinary eating. As they ate, they were linked with all the pleasing aroma of the sacrifice before God, and with all the value He set on that sacrifice.

We may begin some act or expression of worship with our hearts fixed on Christ. Before we reach the end, we may become taken up with what we are doing or saying, or with the people listening to us. In this way we may fall into what could be called "iniquity in our holy things." We may begin our worship in the Spirit and end in the flesh. If the Holy Spirit gives us "five words" of worship or thanksgiving, let us say the five and stop. If we go further, we are eating the flesh of our sacrifice beyond the time — and far from being "accepted," it is really "an abomination."

With a vow, the meat might be eaten the second day after the burning of the fat — the LORD's food of the offering. With a thanksgiving offering, it was to be eaten the same day. This tied the purity of the worshippers' service to the offering of the fat to God. If the peace offering was eaten apart from this offering of the fat, it was mere fleshly festivity, or a form of worship with no real communion with the delight and good pleasure of God. It was worse than unacceptable — it was really iniquity.

Nothing is of any value, in God's judgement, that is not directly connected with Christ. There may be a great deal of what looks like worship, which is, after all, only the excitement and outflow of natural feeling.

If any worship or praise to God is not connected with the value of the work of His Son, it is simply an abomination in His sight. In other words, people who have never been washed in the precious blood of Christ are not accepted as worshippers before God. God is more jealous about the way He is worshipped than about anything else, and that is usually the last thing Christians think about. When Aaron's sons Nadab and Abihu offered unauthorised fire before the LORD, they were struck dead, because they did not come to Him in the way God had commanded. And what did Moses say? "Among those who are near me I will be sanctified" (Leviticus 10:3).

See that your worship stands inseparably connected with the work of the cross. See that Christ is the ground, Christ the material, and the Holy Spirit the power of your worship. Take care that your outward act of worship does not stretch beyond the inward power.

The burnt offering was for God alone. The sin offering was not for every Israelite to eat either. The peace offering was different: every Israelite could eat it, as long as he was clean. Of the peace offering it says: "All who are clean may eat flesh" (Lev. 7:19). This supports the thought that the peace offering speaks of fellowship.

The people ate of one offering only, and that was the peace offering. Leviticus 7:19 says of this peace offering: "All who are clean may eat flesh." The one who ate of the peace offering was in communion with the altar.

The priest and the man who brought the peace offering both had the privilege of eating it. Yet if that meat touched anything unclean, no one was to eat it (v. 19). The link with uncleanness was enough to defile it. If the meat was clean, those who were clean could eat it.

So holiness must moderate, guard and govern the joy of fellowship. "Flesh that touches any unclean thing shall not be eaten. It shall be burned up with fire." Being too casual with God is an offence when we express praise and blessing. What is it to sing to God words we know are neither true nor fitting? We are under a solemn duty to see it gone!

Every Israelite could be invited to share the feast. But one condition would not bend: he must be clean… Grace leaves us free to enjoy fellowship with the LORD, with Christ the Priest, with all His priests and with the simplest of His people. Yet we are just as bound to refuse everything irreverent and everything sinful. If we bring into that fellowship what offends God's nature and will, we do it at our own risk before Him. He will not fail to vindicate Himself and His word.

Verse 20 deals with a person's own uncleanness… Anyone who is evil in life or wrong in teaching cannot take part in the breaking of bread. Verse 21, though, speaks of "touching". That points to defilement through association. An Israelite might be clean in himself. But if he had contact with anything unclean, he could not eat the peace offering.

But if someone ate this offering while he was unclean, he was to be "cut off from his people" (v. 20). Death may seem a harsh sentence for this. Yet the Lord means to press on us how serious it is to pretend we have fellowship with Him while we go on in sinful ways.

See what care God took to guard His people from trying what His nature must reject… Under law, death was the penalty if an unclean person ate the peace offering, because that offering belonged to the Lord. Under grace, we are told to confess our sins, and communion will be restored (1 John 1:9).

It is the shared food of those gathered as worshippers, to feast on in Jehovah's presence. But if anyone unclean ate this sacrifice, he was to be cut off from the people (Lev. 7:20). Only as clean people could they meet with Jehovah in this way. Only those already cleansed and accepted can share this delight in the Lord Jesus. He is given as a shared object of communion and enjoyment between God and us, and with one another. In this act, our worship is not merely coming to ask about our acceptance. We already have access, so we come to rejoice with God over the sacrifice, knowing its results. It was a thanksgiving offering, and praise was in it. It all rests on the certainty that full satisfaction has already been made.

Every Israelite could be invited to share the feast, but one condition was fixed: he must be clean… By grace we are free to enjoy fellowship with Jehovah, with Christ the Priest, with all His priests, and with the very simplest of His people. If that is so, we are bound to refuse all irreverence and all sin. If we bring into that fellowship what offends God's nature and will, we do so at our own risk before Him. He will certainly defend Himself and His word. To be a Christian, however real, is not enough on its own — essential as it is. In 1 Corinthians 11:27 the apostle is not speaking of people at the table who are unworthy or unconverted. He is speaking of eating and drinking the Lord's supper in an unworthy way.

If one ate of this offering while he was unclean, he was to be "cut off from his people" (v. 20). Death may seem a harsh sentence for such a thing. But the Lord wants to impress on us how serious it is to pretend to have fellowship with Him while living in sinful practices.

Verse 20 deals with a person's own uncleanness… Anyone who is evil in life, or wrong in what he teaches, cannot take part in the Breaking of Bread. In v. 21, however, "touching" is mentioned. That reminds us of defilement through association. An Israelite might have been clean in himself. Should he have contact with anything unclean, he could not eat of the peace offering.

The people were not examining themselves to see if they were Israelites. That was settled by their birth. Nor do we examine ourselves to find out whether we are children of God, for that was settled for ever when we were born of God by faith in Christ Jesus. But an Israelite who had uncleanness on him, because he had touched something defiling, had to be cleansed from it and made clean before he ate of the peace offering. In the same way, we have to be clean when we come to the Lord's table.

See what care God took to guard His people from attempting what His nature must reject. It was not simply that they would fail in what they sought. They would provoke God, who is light, to act in judgment against them, because He is holy. Under law, death was the penalty if anyone unclean ate of the peace offering, for it belonged to the Lord. Under grace, we are told to confess our sins, and communion will be restored (1 John 1:9).

In the peace offering God has His share. Christ (the High Priest) has His share. The individual offerer has his share. And the family of priests (all believers) have their share. So sharing together in the enjoyment of the sacrifice of Christ stands out as a mark of the peace offering.

Every Israelite could be invited to share the feast, but one condition could not be bent: he had to be clean… Grace leaves us free to enjoy fellowship with the LORD, with Christ the Priest, with all His priests, and with the very simplest of His people. So we are bound to refuse everything irreverent and everything evil.

Verse 20 deals with someone's personal uncleanness… Anyone whose life is evil, or whose teaching is wrong, cannot take part in the Lord's Supper. Verse 21, though, speaks of "touching." That reminds us of defilement through association. An Israelite might be clean in himself. But if he had contact with anything unclean, he could not eat of the peace offering.

This was not a question of personal uncleanness, but simply of association with uncleanness. So today, across the Christian world, countless cases of unclean doctrine and practice have come in. The Christian is warned, "Go out from their midst, and be separate from them, says the Lord, and touch no unclean thing; then I will welcome you" (2 Cor. 6:17).

Here we have two things clearly set before us: sin in us, and sin on us. God permitted "leaven," because there was sin in the worshipper's nature. God forbade "uncleanness," because there should be no sin on the worshipper's conscience. If sin is in question, communion must be out of the question. God has met and provided for the sin He knows is in us, by the blood of atonement… The cutting off of the worshipper for ceremonial uncleanness answers to the suspension of the believer's communion now, because of unconfessed sin.

Death may seem a harsh sentence for such a thing, but the Lord intends to press upon us the seriousness of pretending to have fellowship with Him while indulging in sinful practices.

See what care God took to guard His people from attempting what His nature must reject. It was not only that they would fail in what they came for. They would also provoke God, who is light, to judge them, because He is holy. Under law, death was the penalty if anyone unclean ate the peace offering, for it belonged to the LORD. Under grace, our part is to confess our sins, and communion will be restored (1 John 1:9).

God's hand in discipline had removed some of the Corinthians for a sin that was, in principle, like the one Leviticus 7:21 warned Israel against.

Being a Christian, however real, is not enough on its own, essential as it is. In 1 Corinthians 11:27 the apostle is not speaking of unworthy or unconverted people at the table, but of eating and drinking the Lord's Supper "in an unworthy manner."

This last truth accounts for the separate communication that follows in Lev. 7:22-27. The peace offering was the only one of these offerings that allowed the Lord's people to eat. So the abuse of that privilege had to be strictly forbidden. This prohibition reached everyone without exception. The word had come to Aaron and his sons in Lev. 6:24-25. It stretches down to this point in Lev. 7, where God tells Moses to speak to the children of Israel: they were to eat no fat of the sacrificial animals, nor of any animal that died on its own or was torn. And all blood was forbidden outright. The inward energy was sacred to Jehovah, and the life was too. He would allow no meddling with His sole right here.

This is clearly the right place to insert the prohibition before us. It follows the law of the peace offerings, which had carefully set out the general rules about eating and not eating. In that sacrifice, as in the sin offering, the greatest stress fell on the fat, above all the fat of the inner parts. Aaron's sons were to burn it on the altar as the food of the fire offering, a sweet aroma to Jehovah. The fat stood for the excellence and energy that belonged to what was offered to Jehovah in sacrifice.

The fat pictures the energy of the inward will; compare Deut. 32:15, "Jeshurun grew fat and kicked" — the will was in opposition to God. Here the fat was not the Lord's. In the Lord Jesus there was perfect subjection and devotedness: "Behold, I have come to do your will, O God." There the fat was all the Lord's.

The peace offering is thanksgiving and praise. At heart it is an offering of communion. God had His part, Aaron and his sons theirs, the priest who sprinkled the blood his, and last of all, the one who brought it had his share.

The Father alone could rightly appreciate the unique excellence of Christ, who said, "I delight to do your will, O God." God alone could measure all that was involved in accepting His will without reserve. That acceptance included all the suffering and shame of the cross. So it fits that the Spirit calls the fat "the food of the offering." It is Jehovah's own portion, the part that He alone can appreciate. As another has said, "We can contemplate what is not given us to appropriate."

The fat of the offering was God's own portion. So He withheld it from His people under penalty of death... The nations around them could eat the fat freely; Israel could not. Were the people then worse off than the Gentiles? Certainly not. They were God's own people, privileged and blessed beyond all others. But being such, they were to obey. They were to own that what the fat pictured must be surrendered wholly to God. We see that in the life of the Lord Jesus Christ here below. Others feel free to indulge in things that do not suit a child of God. So, like Israel, we have to own that we must check the liberty to follow our own will. This may make us seem odd in the eyes of the world.

In Israel God insisted that it was a perpetual statute that they eat neither fat nor blood. Today Scripture warns believers plainly not to eat blood (Acts 15:20). God brought in this restriction when He first allowed men to eat animals (Gen. 9:3-4), long before He gave the law to Israel. But neither at that time, nor under grace today, is there any restriction about eating fat.

Life belongs to God, and in the blood is the life of the flesh. So whoever eats the blood in effect claims that life belongs to him. That is an act of high treason against God.

Of these offerings, the peace offering was the only one Jehovah's people were allowed to eat. So any abuse of the privilege had to be strictly forbidden. This prohibition reached everyone without exception. The word had come to Aaron and his sons; here Moses is told to speak to the people of Israel. No fat of the sacrificial animals was to be eaten, nor of what died of itself, or was torn. Blood too was completely forbidden. Not only the inward energy, but the life as well was sacred to Jehovah. He would allow no meddling with His sole right and title here.

This portion of the sacrifices was to be burned on the altar, for all the fat is the Lord's. As to the fat, this seems to refer to that "of ox, or of sheep, or of goat," the animals of sacrifice. It also refers to the fat of any animal that died of itself, or was torn by beasts (Leviticus 7:23-24). In Nehemiah 8:10 the call went out, "eat the fat," with no restriction. But there the Hebrew word is different, and means something closer to "rich food."... The "fat" signifies the best part, the inward energy and will.

The fat shows the energy of the inward will. Compare Deuteronomy 32:15, "Jeshurun grew fat, and kicked" — the will was in opposition to God. Here the fat was not the Lord's. In the Lord Jesus, there was perfect subjection and devotedness: "Behold, I have come to do your will, O God." There the fat was all the Lord's.

Only the Father could rightly appreciate Christ's unique excellence. God alone could measure all that was involved in accepting His will without reserve. That acceptance included all the suffering and shame of the cross... It is Jehovah's exclusive portion; that which He alone can appreciate. As another has said, "We can contemplate what is not given us to appropriate."

Keep this expression firmly in mind: "which belong to the Lord" (Leviticus 7:20). The worship — what passes in our hearts in it — is not ours. It is God's. God has put it there for our joy, so that we may share in the offering of Christ, His joy in Christ. But the moment we make it ours, we desecrate it.

The flesh of the peace offering could be eaten. So some might reason that the fat and blood should not be withheld from them either. Many today reason in the same way, for they do not distinguish things that differ. So God insists, as He had often done before, that the fat of any offerings was never to be eaten. Disobedience to this law was also punishable by death (Leviticus 7:25).

The surrounding nations could freely eat the fat, which to Israel was forbidden. Were the people, then, worse off than the Gentiles? Certainly not. They were God's own people, privileged and blessed beyond all others. But being such they were to be obedient. They were to own that what the fat pictured was to be all surrendered to God, as we see it was in the Lord Jesus Christ's life here below. There are things in which others feel free to indulge that are not suited for a child of God. So, like Israel, we have to own that the liberty to exercise our own will must be checked.

Today Scripture plainly warns believers not to eat blood (Acts 15:20). God introduced this restriction when He first allowed men to eat animals (Genesis 9:3-4), long before He gave the law to Israel. Neither at that time, nor under grace today, is there any restriction as to eating fat.

The fat points to the energy of the inward will. Compare Deuteronomy 32:15: "Jeshurun grew fat, and kicked." The will stood against God. Here the fat was not the Lord's. In the Lord Jesus there was perfect submission and devotion: "Behold, I have come to do your will, O God." There the fat was all the Lord's.

The fat stood for the inner excellence and energy of what people offered in sacrifice to Jehovah. So it was not for the priests to use. It was a restful odour to Him who alone could fully value it in the One it pictured.

An animal that died of itself, or that another animal killed, was already forbidden whole in Exodus 22:31. Israel was to throw it to the dogs. Its fat was even more clearly unlawful for Israelites, since they were holy to Jehovah. In any other way they might use it.

Life belonged to God and was to be consecrated to God; to Him alone it belonged or could belong. Life spent or taken by another was high treason against God's title… But it was no less true that everything belonged to God and belongs to God. Man could not take it for his own use. A man might still use it when a beast died or was torn. But whenever man of his own will took the life of a beast, he had to recognise God's title, submit his will, and own that the will of God alone has a claim.

The worshipper could eat the flesh of the peace offering. So some might reason that God should not hold back the fat and blood from them either. Many today reason in the same way, for they do not distinguish things that differ. So God insists, as He had often done before, that the fat of any offering was never to be eaten. It speaks of the energy of the Lord's devotion to His Father, and was therefore for God alone.

In the light of all this, how fitting that the Spirit calls the fat "the food of the offering." It is Jehovah's exclusive portion, the part He alone can appreciate. As another has said, "We can contemplate what is not given us to appropriate."

The fat allowed there was of course not the fat kept for Him alone in the sacrificial portions. It was fitting that He should have His own delight in what glorified Him in Christ. And it was wonderful grace that we should have not just pardon or justification, but real fellowship in the same Christ, though not in the same measure or way. If God shares His joy with us in Christ's sacrifice, then those who are His should listen all the more to His call to reverence and godly fear.

The first thing I notice is that he refuses entirely what nature would have accepted and enjoyed. I have no doubt the devil said, "There is no use setting up to be separated to God in a day of ruin; you are in Babylon, do as Babylon does." I have a purpose in my heart, replies Daniel — and he stuck to it.

The peace offering was the only one of these offerings that allowed eating on the part of the Lord's people. So any abuse of the privilege had to be rigidly forbidden. This prohibition reached everyone without exception... And all blood, of every kind, was forbidden as food. Not only the inward energy, but the life too was sacred to the Lord. He would allow no meddling with His sole right and title here.

Life belonged to God and was to be consecrated to God; to Him alone it belonged or could belong. Life spent or taken by another was high treason against God's title... But it was no less true that all belonged to God and belongs to God: man could not take it for his own use. A man could use it in the case of a beast that died or was torn. But whenever he chose to take the life of a beast, he had to recognise God's title, submit his will, and own the will of God as alone having a claim.

But the blood was forbidden to the whole people, who knew, as no one else then did, that life belongs to God. It did not matter what the animal was, fowl or beast: all of it was forbidden. Eating blood denied the rights of God the Creator; and if man forfeited his own rights by sin, the Lord maintained His title over life unimpaired.

Life belongs to God, so no one of the human race was to eat blood. The sinner, too, has forfeited his life. He can only live before God through the death of a sacrifice in his place... But if they were forbidden the blood, they were reminded how it could speak to God on their behalf. The blood makes atonement for the soul... Of three important truths, then, the prohibition to eat blood reminds us. We are creatures, and must remember it. We were by nature sinners, and must acknowledge it. We owe atonement by blood wholly to God, and must always own it... So atonement is all of grace. The One to whom life belongs has given the blood to be poured out for our everlasting blessing.

On the other hand, the blood of no living creature could they eat; for life belongs to God. The recognition that life belongs to God is binding on all men... God has forbidden blood to all. He forbade the fat of the sacrifice only to His people.

This ban started when God first allowed animals to be eaten as food (Genesis 9:3-5). Blood was never to be eaten, and this is as true today as it was then (Acts 15:28-29). As for eating fat, this was forbidden only in the case of animals being sacrificed (v. 25). But any eating of blood was punishable by death under law (v. 27). We do not carry out that sentence under grace, though eating blood is just as serious a wrong today as at any time. For "the blood is the life," and in this matter we must recognise God's rights as the Lifegiver.

As a Jew, obedient to the word of God, Daniel could not eat the food of the Gentile nations. Even with the animals a Jew could eat, the fat and the blood were forbidden... So Daniel and his companions could not accept the royal food. To take it, they would have had to give up their faith and reject the word of their God.

But the blood was completely forbidden to the people who knew, as no others did in those days, that life belongs to God. It made no difference what the animal was, bird or beast — all of it was forbidden absolutely. Eating blood denied the rights of God, the Creator. Man forfeited his own rights by sin, but the LORD kept His title over life untouched. God set up human government in the first place to deal with death caused on purpose. Shed blood is its sign, and it belongs to God alone. Man has no right to take it for himself.

The blood of no beast or bird was to be eaten, for it is the life of the creature, and life belongs to God. For Israel, this rule enforced in a special way what God laid down after the flood, in Noah's time (Genesis 9:4). So the apostles and elders gave this instruction to Gentile believers, as recorded in Acts 15:20 and 29. They were not imposing a mere item of the law of Moses on them. This is a prohibition that applies to all people. We do well to keep it. But we do not need to copy the extreme care the Jews took, as the instruction of 1 Corinthians 10:25 shows.

Feasting with God on the fat of the inner parts of any animal offered in sacrifice would have been a privilege — fellowship with Him. As food, it was flatly denied them. What the fat symbolised was for God... On the other hand, they could not eat the blood of any living creature; for life belongs to God. The recognition that life belongs to God is binding on all men... God has forbidden blood to all. He forbade the fat of the sacrifice only to His people.

Blood was never to be eaten, and this is as true today as it was then (Acts 15:28-29). As to eating fat, this was forbidden only in cases of animals being sacrificed (v. 25). But any eating of blood was punishable by death, under law (v. 27). Such a sentence is not to be carried out under grace, though eating blood is just as seriously wrong today as at any time. For "the blood is the life," and we must in this matter recognise God's rights as the lifegiver.

So complete was the change that now He commands what would once have been the greatest sin. Unless one eats the flesh and drinks the blood of the Son of Man, there is no life. The sign of His death gives life to us, and is absolutely necessary. To have life one must drink what was due only and strictly to God the judge of sin. But now Christ has changed it all for us. The very blood that it would have been most criminal to touch or taste before must now be drunk by us. So the standing witness to the work of Christ that the Christian sees is in the bread and wine of the Lord's Supper.

This man had learned, I have no doubt, to read the Scriptures. He knew that the king's meat had been offered to idols, and he also knew God's mind about the fat and the blood.

It is not brought because of any trespass. No forgiveness is connected with it, and it is not said to make atonement… In Leviticus 7:11-21 and 28-36 we have "the law" of this offering. Verse 30 appoints that the offerer is to bring the portions that are to be burnt to the altar with his own hands. This is special to the peace offering. He is not to put these on the altar — the priest must do that — but bring them to it. It is the nearest approach for the Israelite (not a priest) to God.

This passage is a picture of presenting the excellencies of Christ to God the Father. You cannot do that second-hand. It calls for personal exercise of heart, pictured by the stress laid on the offerer's own hands.

"His own hands shall bring the offerings of the Lord made by fire" (v.30)… It is not only what we gain from others, but what do they gain from us? This peace offering would raise the question with every one of us: What are we adding to the little company where we belong, that spiritually enriches them? It is not a question of giving lectures or standing up and preaching the gospel. It is the bringing of anything that bears the character of Christ Himself.

When we come to the law of the peace offering, there is a portion for Jehovah, for the priest who offers it, for the priests in general, and for the company. There is God's joy, Christ's own joy; the priests generally, as such, rejoice, and so does the company of the faithful.

We now come to the final revelation about the peace offering, and its subject is the right sharing out of the different parts of the sacrifice among everyone concerned. Chapter 3 has already described how Jehovah's part was prepared and offered. Here we learn that the breast was waved and the right shoulder heaved. Both acts mean the same thing: an open acknowledgement that the portion waved or heaved was for God. The breast speaks of the affections, the right shoulder of a person's strength, which in Christ were both given wholly to God. The breast was for Aaron and his sons. God gave it to them, and what it pictures God has given us — the love of Christ to share in. The right shoulder was for the priest who offered, the picture of the Lord Himself. For who knew as He did the strength needed to do God's will!

They sprinkled the blood on the altar and then ate the sacrifice. So those who knowingly shared in it were counted as partakers of the altar. This was the way of showing communion, whether with an idol or between a believer and God… Christ is presented here as the perfect burnt offering, wholly given up to God in death for His glory. But He is also an offering on which we feed. He is not only God's delight; He is that of which we can partake with Him. He is the subject-matter of communion.

If Christians in gladness of heart come to seek the Lord in communion, the Spirit is present… But if they are not very watchful, their joy degenerates. It outlasts what is spiritual and becomes joy in the flesh. The real test and power of this is its connection with the sacrifice offered.

No other offering opens up the worshipper's communion as fully as the peace offering does. In the burnt offering, Christ offers Himself to God. In the grain offering, we have Christ's perfect humanity. Then, moving on to the sin offering, we learn that sin at its root is fully met. In the trespass offering, there is a full answer to the actual sin in the life. But none of them opens up the teaching of the worshipper's communion. That belongs to the peace offering, and this, I believe, is why the law of that offering stands where it does. It comes last of all. It teaches us that when it is a question of the soul feeding on Christ, it must be a full Christ.

The law of the peace offering runs from verse 11 to verse 34. The order of the offerings is changed, and here it comes last. The reason, we suppose, is this. In the other cases only the priests shared in the offering. Here the ordinary person who brought it was allowed a share as well.

It is not brought because of any trespass. No forgiveness is connected with it, and it is not said to make atonement… In Leviticus 7:11-21 and 28-36 we have "the law" of this offering. Verse 30 lays down that the offerer must bring the portions that are to be burned to the altar with his own hands. This is special to the peace offering. He is not to put them on the altar — the priest must do that — but he brings them to it. This is the nearest an Israelite who is not a priest can come to God.

In picture, this passage speaks of presenting the excellencies of Christ to God the Father. No one can do that second-hand. It calls for real exercise of heart, pictured by the stress laid on the offerer's own hands.

First of all we must be sure that it is "of the Lord". It is no good bringing something that comes from ourselves, something we have imagined or something we like. There is no room for such offerings in the divine circle. But however small it is, even if it is only one small feature of Christ, there is room for it in that circle. We must be sure that what we bring is entirely "of the Lord". It must be divine in origin.

We are all able to bring something. One thing about this peace offering is that its width brings everyone in. Who cannot give thanks to God? Who cannot freely offer something for the pleasure of God?… Whatever we bring as a peace offering becomes food for the souls of the saints; it is an offering to God. Whatever we bring, the idea is spiritual food that enriches the company we belong to.

A fresh word from the Lord in verses 28-36 claims the breast that is waved and the shoulder that is lifted up out of the peace offering. The breast was for the whole priestly family, Aaron and his sons; the shoulder was for the priest who offered. Each was their fixed portion for ever from the children of Israel. So the Lord had His part, and the Israelite was free to enjoy his own — himself, his family, and any Israelite he invited to share, as long as they were clean. Only in this last word from Him, and in solemn, emphatic language, do we find that He reserved a special portion, not to weaken the fellowship but to deepen it. Aaron and his sons, as we have seen, stand for Christ and His own. For us, communion falls short if it does not take in the Head and the body, all the saints.

This passage speaks in picture form of presenting the excellencies of Christ to God the Father. That is something which cannot be done second-hand. It calls for personal exercise of heart, pictured by the stress laid on the offerer's own hands.

"The law" of this offering says that the offerer must bring the portions that are to be burnt to the altar with his own hands. This is special to the peace offering. He is not to put these on the altar — the priest must do that — but bring them to it. It is the nearest approach for the Israelite (who is not a priest) to God. The breast was given to Aaron and his sons; the rest belonged to the offerer, for himself and his household.

The fat speaks of the excellency of the offerings, and it always goes to God; the fat comes first. Before we can help other believers, we must be going on with our own souls before God. We must present the thing to God Himself — the excellencies of that offering — if the people of God are going to get the benefit of a food offering in that circle.

The offering is called "the food" or "bread" of the fire offering to the Lord. How wonderful that He and we enjoy the same offering! How far from the truth of Christ it is, then, to find in this burning of the fat "the offering up of our good affections to God in all our prayers and praises." Far worse still is to call it "the putting to death of our corrupt affections and lusts, and the burning up of them by the fire of divine grace." … No; it was neither our good offered up, nor our bad put to death, but the inward energy of Christ Himself, as the perfect and lasting ground of communion for God and His family.

The rabbis explain that the heave shoulder was moved up and down, and the wave breast waved from side to side. The actions were done "before the Lord." They seem to picture those who moved the offerings as really in His presence, with their hands filled with Christ.

The idea in a heave-offering was the taking up of a part to offer it to God. The idea of the wave-offering is wider: it implies consecration to God, for it was waved before the Lord.

The priest waved the breast before it was eaten by "Aaron and his sons." The waving would speak of our grasp and enjoyment of the love of Christ. It matches the delight that God has in it. None of the priestly sons are shut out from enjoying "the love of Christ"; it was the portion of all to feed on the breast.

We should all bring something to that company that is of help to them; it is not only what we gain from others, but what do they gain from us? … There may be testing about it — the offerings of the Lord are "made by fire," tested by holy discernment in the power of the Spirit of God. It is called a sacrifice, and that means it may cost us a little to keep the thing going. It costs time and opportunity we could have used on ourselves, but which we are quite prepared to give to the company for the blessing of all.

The fat stood for the inner excellence and energy of the sacrifice offered to Jehovah. So it was not for the priests to use. It was a fragrance of rest to Him who alone could fully value it in the One that sacrifice pictured.

Notice here that the LORD (Jehovah) had His part first. That part was the inward worth and excellencies of the victim. He alone knew, or could measure, the real worth and inward energy and affection of our Lord Jesus Christ. This is an important point. We may be sure that those who walk in fellowship with the Father seek His glory and His things first. Those who make a rule of attending to the things of God after they have done their own things know little of communion, even if they do know peace.

The rabbis explain that the heave shoulder was moved up and down, and the wave breast waved from side to side. They did these actions "before the Lord." This seems to picture those who moved the offerings as truly in His presence, with their hands full of Christ.

The wave breast speaks of the movement of affection. The heave shoulder speaks of the movement of strength. But the wave breast always came before the heave shoulder. That is, love lies under the vertical heave offering. The ability behind the movement of strength is love.

Aaron and his sons typify all believers. The breast was their portion. What does the breast speak to us of? The place of affection. The love of the Lord Jesus to us is beyond words, and it is our portion forever. We must always remember that the blessed Lord Jesus loves all His people. As individuals we say, He "loved me and gave Himself for me." As one people we say, He "loved the church and gave Himself up for her."

Aaron is typical of Christ, and his sons speak of God's saints as worshipers. When the offering came to the Lord, the breast was waved as a wave offering to the Lord and then given to Aaron and his sons. The sacrifice of course speaks of Christ sacrificed on Calvary. But the wave breast reminds us of His exaltation in heaven. The breast shows the warmth of His love flowing out now, and that is wonderful food for true worshipers.

So God, the offering priest, Aaron and his sons, and the person who brought the animal all fed on the same thing — the same animal. It becomes, then, a very simple picture of communion with God, with the Lord Jesus Christ — the offering Priest — and with one another as believers.

The breast was the common portion of Aaron and his sons. Eating it shaped the one who ate. So today the love of Christ is the common portion of all the saints, together with Christ. When a believer takes that love in, it forms and nourishes him. We shall love in the way that Christ loved.

Put these verses together, and it becomes very clear. First, the fat was God's, and it was burned on the altar as a sweet savour. Second, the breast belonged to Aaron and his sons. Third, the right shoulder belonged to the offering priest — a picture of the Lord Jesus. As I said before, the one who brought the animal ate the rest of it with his friends. So God, the offering priest, Aaron and his sons, and the person who brought the animal in sacrifice all fed upon the same thing — the same animal. It becomes, therefore, a very simple picture of communion with God, and with the Lord Jesus Christ — the offering Priest — and with one another as believers.

The rabbis explain that the heave shoulder was moved up and down, while the wave breast was waved from side to side. Both actions were done 'before the Lord.' They seem to show that those who moved the offerings stood in His presence, with their hands full of Christ.

The heave offering was more absolute than the wave offering, though the same offering could sometimes be called by either name, depending on the aspect in view. The heave offering was not the whole of what was offered, but a part offered to Jehovah. The whole breast was waved, and the right shoulder was heaved. The breast stood for the affections as a whole, and the shoulder for the strength that could best carry the burden. Christ and His own, near to God, enjoy the love together; and He, as the Priest who offered, has His special joy in what stood for the support of the weak.

God claimed in this way a portion of what the shoulders symbolize, while all that the breast pictured was declared to belong to Him. The shoulder seems to stand for capability for service; and the right shoulder means that what was best able to bear the burden should be given up to Him.

The right shoulder stood for strength, and it went to the one who pictured the Lord Jesus. Who but the One who gave up His life on the cross could know what strength that took?

It was the priest's due; but God would not leave him to claim it. The person who brought the sacrifice was to give him the right shoulder. To Aaron and his sons, the males of the holy priesthood, he was to give the breast. The Lord claimed these portions, the right shoulder to be heaved, and the breast to be waved; and then, as His, gave them to the priests. This rule for the officiating priest was never to be abolished.

The right shoulder was the portion of the priest who offered the blood and the fat of the peace offering. As we present Christ to God in communion, we can feed on Him. In His walk down here He was always for the will and pleasure of God, and in this way we would gain the strength to walk "even as He walked."

If we turn to the law of the offerings, we find that the rest was eaten. The breast was for Aaron and his sons, a picture of the whole church. The right shoulder was for the priest who sprinkled the blood, and he is more especially a picture of Christ as the offering priest. The rest of the animal was eaten by the man who presented it, and by those he invited.

When the peace offering had been dealt with correctly at the altar, the priest who offered it received his appointed portion. The person who brought the offering had to give it to him. It was the priest's due; but God would not leave him to claim it: the person who brought the sacrifice was to give him the right shoulder... This rule about the officiating priest was never to be cancelled. In the wilderness the portion was his, and in the land too (Deut. 18:3); once they were in the land, the two cheeks and the stomach are named as his portion as well. The right shoulder pictures strength, and it went to the man who pictured the Lord Jesus. For who but the One who gave up His life on the cross could really know what strength that took?

The whole breast was waved and the right shoulder was heaved. The breast stands for the affections as a whole, and the shoulder for the strength that could best carry the burden. Christ and His own enjoy the love together in nearness to God. He, as the Priest who offered, has His own special joy in what stood for the support of the weak. But the fat, or inward energy, like the blood, was Jehovah's portion. So while all shared communion in Christ, each one had what was specially due to him, on unchanging grounds and for ever.

The offering priest is a picture of the Lord Jesus, who offered Himself without spot to God. He must surely have His part in all this blessed communion and joy and worship, because it has all come about through Him.

So God, the offering priest, Aaron and his sons, and the person who brought the animal as a sacrifice all fed on the same thing – the same animal. It becomes, then, a very simple picture of communion with God, with the Lord Jesus Christ – the offering Priest – and with one another as believers.

But the right shoulder became the portion of the priest that offered the blood of the peace offering (Lev. 7:33). So that the offerer was reinforced in his strength for walk by eating. There is thus a singular reflex action between our assimilation of Christ and our strength for right conduct in the responsible sphere of our lives.

But the right shoulder was the portion of the priest who offered the blood and the fat of the peace offering. As we present Christ to God in communion, we can feed on Him who, in His walk down here, always lived for the will and pleasure of God. In this way we would gain the strength to walk "even as He walked" (1 John 2:6).

It was the priest's due, but God would not leave him to claim it… The Lord claimed these portions — the right shoulder to be heaved, the breast to be waved. Then, as His own, He gave them to the priests.

What are we to learn from this rich and generous gift of "the wave breast and heave shoulder" as the priests' food? Only this: that all the unsearchable, perfect love of Christ, and His almighty power too, are laid open to us for the everlasting comfort and strength of our souls. The breast is the seat of the affections, the shoulder the source of power; both are set before us here. And as we feed, the need of our souls is met in the most precious way. It spreads out before us both the affections and the strength of Him who made peace for us by the blood of His cross.

The wave offering was waved from side to side. After that, the right shoulder of the heave offering was lifted up and down. One is the movement of affection, the other the movement of strength. But the wave breast always came before the heave shoulder. Love lies under the upward heave offering: the ability behind the movement of strength is love.

The breast speaks of the affections, the right shoulder of a person's strength, which in Christ were both consecrated to God. The breast was for Aaron and his sons. God gave it to them; and what it pictures God has given us — the love of Christ to share in. The right shoulder was for the priest who offered, the type of the Lord Himself. For who knew as He did the strength needed to do God's will! The rest of the animal the offerer could feast on at home with all his friends who were clean, a picture of Israel's communion with God in the sacrifice of Christ in a day to come. So Christ Himself, Christians, and Israel all have fellowship with God in the death and life of Christ.

The sacrifice of course speaks of Christ sacrificed on Calvary, but the wave breast reminds us of His exaltation in heaven, the breast indicating the warmth of His love flowing out now, which is wonderful food for true worshipers to feed upon.

The whole breast was waved and the right shoulder heaved — the symbols of the affections as a whole, and of the strength best able to carry the burden. Christ and His own, near to God, enjoy the love together. As the Priest who offered, He has His special joy in the part that stood for the support of the weak. So while all had their communion in Christ, each one had what was due to him in particular, on unchangeable ground and for ever.

How great was their sin! They profaned the sacrifices of the people, and to that they added shameless gluttony, though God had made ample provision to support them. But no, this was not enough. They had to have more. If the poor, bullied people of God did not give it willingly, they would take it by force… They stopped at nothing to satisfy their appetites, and robbed both God and His people in their shameless greed.