What is an altar?

A structure on which to offer sacrifices to God: imitated by the heathen in honour of their false gods. The first altar we read of was built by Noah on leaving the ark, on which he offered burnt offerings of every clean beast and clean fowl. Gen. 8:20. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob also built altars to the Lord: these would have been constructed of stone or earth, but it is remarkable that we seldom read of their offering sacrifices on them. At times it is simply said they built an altar unto the Lord and at other times they built an altar and called upon the name of the Lord. The altars appear to have been erected as places of drawing near to God, of which sacrifice was the basis.

Moses was told that in all places where God recorded His name they should build an altar of wood or of stone and offer thereon sheep and oxen for burnt offerings and peace offerings; but such altars if made of stone were not to be made of hewn stone; for had they lifted up a tool upon it, it would have been defiled. Ex. 20:25-26. There must be nothing of man's handiwork in approaching to God: a principle, alas, grossly violated in the professing church of God! It is added, "neither shalt thou go up by steps unto mine altar, that thy nakedness be not discovered thereon." Man's contrivance is here forbidden, for in divine things anything of his only manifests the utter shamelessness of that which springs from fallen nature: cf. Col. 2:20-23. When the tabernacle was made, minute instructions were given to Moses, and he was to make everything as had been shown him in the mount.

An altar in Scripture indicates approach to God, or communion with Him, and the altar was often the place of sacrifice, teaching us that our approach to God, and communion with Him, is based on the one great sacrifice of Christ, to which all the sacrifices of the Old Testament point forward. Before any altar is seen, approach to God is shown to be by sacrifice, in the offering of Abel, who was accepted by God in the efficacy of the innocent victims that died in his stead.

There is very little said in Scripture of the men who lived before the flood, but of Enoch it is recorded that he "walked with God" (Gen. 5:24), and the writer to the Hebrews tells us that "before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God" (Heb. 11:5). In walking With God, Enoch had communion with God, even although there is no mention of an altar till after the flood. When Noah came out of the ark on to the renewed earth, he "builded an altar unto the Lord; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar" (Gen. 8:20).

Moses' first altar was for a memorial of what Jehovah had wrought against Amalek; but all the other altars considered were for the worship and service of God, saving that of Aaron, which exposed what man is in his thoughts, even when having a special place of favour before God.

In looking over the Scriptures, we can see that many of the altars mentioned were built for sacrifice, such as the altar of Noah and the altars of burnt offering in the tabernacle and the temple. Some altars, like those of the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, were to show that they were in communion with God, and that they relied upon Him for care and protection. Others, like that of Jehovah-nissi, commemorated some special occasion; while the golden altars of the tabernacle and the temple were made for the burning of fragrant incense for the worship of Jehovah the God of Israel.

This, then, instead of separating in meaning death and the blood, brings them together, and the whole ritual into entire agreement and simplicity. The blood means death, and, as presented to God upon the altar, atones; for the altar, according to its meaning in the Hebrew, is just "the place of sacrifice;" and thus the death is declared to be and accepted as a sacrificial death.

In olden time an altar was the usual way of approach to God. It might be simply connected with calling on the name of the Lord, as we find in Abraham; or it might be for offering sacrifices, as was done by Noah and others.

The altar had a central place among the children of Israel; for whole burnt-offerings, meat-offerings, peace-offerings, and sin-offerings were there presented to God. Blood too was put upon the horns of the altar, sprinkled upon it, round about it, and poured out at the bottom of the altar. The altar of burnt-offering was thus a connecting-link between the people and Jehovah; that which was done in service with it, while it was blessedly typical and instructive to us, was of a kind suited to a people who were outside the veil - a people in the flesh, with an earthly calling and hope, and outside the holiest of all, the place of God's presence.

The people were so identified with the altar that certain parts of some of the offerings thus presented to God were to be eaten. Hence we read, "Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar?" (1 Cor. 10:18.) This was their altar, and their jealousy was properly stirred if anything seemed to interfere with THE ALTAR for all Israel; for they knew that by it they were remarkably connected with Jehovah. When on one occasion the other tribes heard that the Reubenites had built an altar on the borders of Jordan - "a great altar to see to" - they were greatly alarmed, and severely censured them, because it appeared to be divisive of the one nation, and to rival the one altar which was for all the people who formed the one family of Israel; and they were only satisfied by the Reubenites assuring them that they had not built an altar by Jordan for offering sacrifices thereon, but for a witness. They said, "God forbid that we should rebel against the Lord, and turn this day from following the Lord, to build an altar for burnt-offerings, for meat-offerings, or for sacrifices, beside the altar of the Lord our God that is before His tabernacle." (Joshua 22:29.) It is clear then that Israel had an altar, and that altar was the altar of Jehovah their God, with whom they were in covenant relationship.

The altar was a type of the basis of worship; and, being so, of course the only antitype is Christ. It has three aspects: the stone altar, which is typical in a general way of the basis of reverential approach to God; the brazen altar in the court of the tabernacle — the basis of the sinner's approach and forgiveness; and the golden altar within the veil, the basis of adoration. In the second case, the brass over the wood expresses the power of Christ to sustain judgment, sin being in question. In the third case we see expressed, in His humanity (the wood) and His divine righteousness (the gold,) that which shall form the only and sufficient foundation of eternal praise to God; and in the first case here referred to, Gen. 8:29, we see a type of what is more general and comprehensive, the fulfilment of which shall be seen in the general approach to, and acknowledgment of, God in the millennial age, whereof we read, "In that day there shall be an altar to the Lord in the midst of the land of Egypt … The Lord of hosts shall bless, saying, Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the work of my hands, and Israel, mine inheritance." The other special typical features of the stone altar seem to be its ready accessibility, its stability, and the order (Ex. 20) that no human elaborations be permitted on it.

Two altars are mentioned in verses 24 and 25, one of earth and one of stone. Various altars are mentioned in the word of God, most with the predominant thought of drawing near to God on the ground of sacrifice as worshippers. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob built altars, and these no doubt had been built of earth or stone. What is remarkable about these altars is that we seldom read of sacrifices being offered on them. At times it is simply stated that they built an altar unto the Lord, and at other times they built an altar and called upon the Name of the Lord. In their typical meaning the thought was sustained that approach to God could only be through the death of Christ, who was in Himself both the altar and the sacrifice.

With regard to the altar of stone it is specifically stated: "thou shalt not build it of hewn stone; for if thou lift up thy sharp tool upon it, thou hast profaned it. Neither shalt thou go up by steps unto mine altar, that thy nakedness be not discovered thereon." What a gross violation of God's principles we see all around us today in the lifeless profession that bears the Name of Christ. Not lacking in skill, and of exquisite workman-ship, their richly embellished altars bear eloquent witness to man's complete ignoring of this divine prohibition, and to his unwarranted intrusion in the holiest things of God. Man's handiwork, no matter how gifted, is not required in the worship of God; all must be according to the thought of God, who must be worshipped in "the beauty of holiness."

"And thou shalt make an altar of shittim-wood, five cubits long, and five cubits broad; the altar shall be foursquare; and the height thereof shall be three cubits. And thou shalt make the horns of it upon the four corners thereof; his horns shall be of the same: and thou shalt overlay it with brass. And thou shalt make his pans to receive his ashes, and his shovels, and his basons, and his fleshhooks, and his firepans: all the vessels thereof thou shalt make of brass. And thou shalt make for it a grate of network of brass; and upon the net shalt thou make four brasen rings in the four corners thereof. And thou shalt put it under the compass of the altar beneath, that the net may be even to the midst of the altar. And thou shalt make staves for the altar, staves of shittim-wood, and overlay them with brass. And the staves shall be put into the rings, and the staves shall be upon the two sides of the altar, to bear it. Hollow with boards shalt thou make it; as it was showed thee in the mount, so shall they make it." (vv. 1-8.)

Before entering upon the uses of the altar, it will be necessary to explain its typical meaning. The shittim-wood is found here equally with the ark, the table, etc. But it was overlaid with brass instead of gold. Brass, indeed, is its characteristic. Now brass is divine righteousness, not like that symbolised by the gold according to what He is in Himself, suited, that is, to the divine nature, but as testing man in responsibility. It has always allied with it, on this account, a certain judicial aspect, inasmuch as, meeting man in responsibility, it of necessity judges him because he is a sinner. The altar as a whole, then, is God manifested in righteousness. Hence it formed the meeting-place between God and the sinner; for as long as the sinner is in his sins, God can only meet him on that ground, where he is as under responsibility. The altar consequently was the first thing that met the sinner's eyes when coming up out of the world into the court of the Tabernacle. But then it was an altar — and as such was a symbol of the cross of Christ. When the sinner therefore came to the altar, when he came believing in the efficacy of the sacrifice, though the altar tested him in responsibility, he found that all his sins were gone, and that he could stand before God in all the sweet savour of the sacrifice which had been consumed there. Its very position displays this character. It was just outside of the world, and just inside the court. So when Christ was rejected, He was cast out of the world — lifted up above it, when nailed to the shameful tree. But there on the cross, as on the altar in figure, He met and bore the whole of man's responsibility "went down under all God's holy judgment against sin, and so abundantly answered to every claim of His glory, that the fire fed gratefully upon the sacrifice, which, totally consumed upon the altar, went up as a sweet savour of acceptance to God. It was the burnt-offering, and not the sin-offering which was placed upon the brazen altar. The sin-offering was burnt without the camp. The brazen altar teaches rather what God found — His part — in the death of Christ; and it is not until we have learnt this truth that we can draw near with holy boldness into His presence.*

An Altar. — Needful was this reminder, for busy was the enemy, desirous if possible to draw back some from the faith by carrying them away with divers and strange doctrines. Jewish teaching he refers to, which cannot really establish the heart. Meats will not do that; grace alone will. And all such teaching as he here deprecates profited not them that were occupied with it. In the nature of things, in the presence of Christianity, and as opposed to it, such teaching could not profit. And would any seek to draw away the Hebrews by taunting them with having forsaken the altar before which they once stood, and with worshipping without one? The patriarchs had their altars. The law recognised one. The Christians seemingly had none. Now they were taught to answer all such taunts and to meet any objection of that kind with the bold declaration that they had an altar, but one whereof they had no right to eat which served the tabernacle. A privilege was theirs as Christians, debarred the priests under the law. Again Judaism pales before Christianity.

What was the privilege? Under the law the sin offering, whose blood was brought into the sanctuary for sin, was burned without the camp, carried forth by the priests to a clean place, and there consumed by fire (Lev. 4:11-12, 6:30, 16:27). Of those sin offerings, however, whose blood was not brought into the sanctuary the priests were commanded to eat. It was part of their portion as ministering at the altar, being partakers of, or in communion with the altar. The former sin offering was expressly withheld from them. Now it is of that sin offering whose blood was carried into the heavenly sanctuary (9:12) we can and do partake. We feed on Christ, and our altar is the cross on which He died. Here is the only place where an altar for Christians on earth is mentioned. And the use we make of it is plainly stated. We stand not at it. We offer not on it. We eat that which has been offered upon it. But we eat not at it. No priest under the law made the brazen altar his table. It was Jehovah's table (Mal. 1:7, 12), for there was His portion consumed by the fire which came from heaven. It was not the priest's table, though he ate of certain things which had been offered upon it; but he did not eat at it. A visible altar, then, we Christians have not; nor had these Hebrews. Their altar and ours ever remains in remembrance — the cross on which our Lord Jesus Christ was crucified for us. Any altar men may now erect would not be the cross on which He died. It would be another altar, and a needless one, because the Lord cannot die again. He lives to die no more (Rom. 6:9-10). One altar we have, and in the nature of things it cannot be multiplied.

We have an altar, that on which, as the term implies, the sacrifice for sin was offered up. Is then the Lord's table correctly termed the altar, as so commonly is done in our day? A reference to the principles of the Mosaic ritual may here also be of use to us. The priests under the law partook of the altar, but they did not feast at the altar. They ate the bread of their God in a holy place, in the court of the tabernacle of the congregation, but they did not eat it on the altar. On that they sacrificed, elsewhere they ate. And, if in Numbers 18:10 the words "in the most holy place" are to be understood in their literal import, whilst they ate in person the portion reserved for them in a holy place in the court, they were regarded by God as in spirit partaking of it in the innermost sanctuary, into which through grace we have now liberty to enter by the blood of Jesus Christ. And in that of course there was no altar. At the Lord's table we sit to eat, but the place where the priests were to eat their portion is defined in Leviticus 10:12-13 as being near the altar, and so quite distinct from it. To have turned the altar into their table would surely in their eyes, and in the eyes of all Israel, have been a monstrous thing.

But is not the altar, it may be replied, called in the Old Testament the table of the Lord? Malachi (Mal. 1:7,12) thus writes of the altar of burnt-offering, and Ezekiel (Ezek. 41:22, Ezek. 44:16) of the altar of incense. And it is not difficult to understand this, since on both these altars the Lord's own portion was consumed by the fire, which came down from heaven; so what was burnt on the altar of burnt-offering was called "the food of the offering made by fire unto the Lord." (Lev. 3:11.) But, though the altar in the Old Testament could be called the table of the Lord, we never read in the New Testament of the table under the term altar. The altar was the Lord's table, because He there fed, as it were, on the sacrifice which was burnt on it. It was His table, at which He alone fed. The Lord's table in the New Testament is that which the Lord set up, at which too He presided, but off which He did not eat. (Luke 22:19-20.) He ate the passover with His disciples; but did not, could not, partake with them of the supper. We however have a place at the Lord's table, because we have an altar. We eat at the one, we glory in the other. Although then in the Old Testament the table of the Lord and the altar are the same, what is termed the Lord's table in the New is something very different from it. The altar of the Old Testament is strictly speaking the table of Jehovah, but the table of 1 Corinthians 10:21 belongs to Him who by position, dignity, and title is the Lord.