Exodus: Unity of Law and Grace
The Laver
Professor: Dr. R.J. Rushdoony
Subject: Pentateuch
Lesson: The Laver
Genre: Lessons with Q & A
Track: 108
Dictation Name: RR171BF108
Location/Venue:
Year: Early 70’s
Let us worship God. Blessed are the undefiled in the way who walk in the law of the Lord. Order my steps in thy word and let not any iniquity have dominion over me. Blessed are they that keep his testimonies and that seek Him with the whole heart. Let us pray.
Almighty God, our heavenly Father, we thank thee that, by thy providence, all things are so ordered, that we all have our place in thy purpose and in thy kingdom. We thank thee that thou hast called us for thy purposes for time and eternity, and all thy ways are altogether righteous and holy. Give us grace to take hands off our lives and to commit them into thy keeping, to know that thou art God and beside thee, there is none other, and it is thy will alone that shall be done. Bless us now as we give ourselves to the study of thy word. In Christ’s name, amen.
Our scripture is Exodus 30:17-21. Exodus 30:17-21 and our subject: The Laver. “And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Thou shalt also make a laver of brass, and his foot also of brass, to wash withal: and thou shalt put it between the tabernacle of the congregation and the altar, and thou shalt put water therein. For Aaron and his sons shall wash their hands and their feet thereat: when they go into the tabernacle of the congregation, they shall wash with water, that they die not; or when they come near to the altar to minister, to burn offering made by fire unto the LORD: so they shall wash their hands and their feet, that they die not: and it shall be a statute for ever to them, even to him and to his seed throughout their generations.”
Now there is a notable fact about this brief paragraph. It is that the threat or promise of death for noncompliance is twice repeated. This is especially interesting because this is a ritual washing that is dealt with. There is no instance of this ever having been enforced because there is no known occasion when it was violated. In other words, it was a very salutatory rule. It had compliance. It can be assumed that the priests came to the tabernacle or temple already bathed. In fact, we already have evidence for that. It is a modern illusion that everyone prior to our time or outside the modern era was unbathed routinely. In reality, it was after the Black Death that Europeans began to depart from faithful bathing. So the modern age has been the dirty one.
In general, the premise of this text is that both spiritual and physical cleanliness are required in approaching God. The proverb “cleanliness is next to godliness” comes right out of this biblical insistence of moral and physical cleanliness. The laver or large basin was of bronze. According to Exodus 38:8, it was made of the bronze mirrors donated by a number of women. Bronze mirrors were highly polished to give an excellent reflection. They could be made to reflect one’s image almost as good as glass, and they had the advantage of being portable. They could not be readily broken as can glass, but they could be scratched.
There are different opinions as to the size of the laver, we have no definite indication. After offering various sacrifices, the priests obviously needed to wash their hands. Sometimes more than once after coming to the sanctuary. The laver was located in the courtyard just before the entrance into the tabernacle, according to verse 18. Some synagogues still have lavers at the entrance for a ceremonial hand washing by worshipers.
Priests in Israel were forbidden to touch any sacred object until after washing. The laver was apparently filled with water by machinery, and at the time of our Lord, the laver was large enough so that twelve priests could wash at the same time. We have a confirmation of the fact that the priests bathed before coming to the sanctuary, and that this requirement of the laver was a ritual cleansing, because in our Lord’s words to Peter in John 13:10-11, he refers to this and says, “He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all. For he knew who should betray him; therefore said he, Ye are not all clean.”
The laver means that God requires that we be cleansed. It represents sanctification of holiness. This meaning is clearly indicated in a number of texts in the Bible. For example, in Psalm 26:6-7, David refers to this. “I will wash mine hands in innocency: so will I compass thine altar, O Lord: that I may publish with the voice of thanksgiving, and tell of all thy wondrous works.” David not only sets forth the requirement of sanctification, but a purpose of sanctification: the glorification of God and His works. Water is the great purifier. The world not only quenches its thirst with water but washes with it.
W.G. Moorhead, almost a century ago, wrote, and I quote, “The laver prefigures regeneration. In Titus 3:5 we read, ‘Not by works of righteousness we have done, but according to His mercy he saved us by the washing to regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost.’ The phrase ‘washing of regeneration’ literally rendered is ‘laver of regeneration.’ The Greek text is, uh term is the same as that used by the Septuagint in Exodus 30:18, our text. The reference seems to be to the laver of the tabernacle. The renewing by the Spirit is a creative act and is identical to being born again or born anew. This regeneration is described as being by the laver or washing by the Spirit. What is the laver? Baptism? We think not. In Ephesians 5:25-26, Paul tells us that ‘Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for it that He might sanctify and cleanse it with a washing (literally laver) of water by the word.’ The word is here represented as achieving the results of a bath: cleansing, sanctifying. Is this the office of baptism? We certainly think not. The means the Holy Spirit employs to effect this radical and profound change in a sinner which is called regeneration is the word, the truth of God. James writes, ‘Of his own will begat He us with the word of truth.’ Peter writes, ‘Being born again, not of corruptible seed but of incorruptible by the Word of God which liveth and abideth forever.’ This testimony is unmistakable and conclusive. The agent of regeneration is the Spirit and the instrument he employs in effecting it is the Word of God. No ordinance however important, no rite however precious can ever effect it.”
In other words, we can only approach God when we are made a new creation. Only then do we have full access to Him. Ephesians 5:26 speaks of sanctification and cleansing with the water, washing of water by the word, and again, this can be rendered by the “laver of water.” The stress, however, is on the word. By the laver of water by the word. John 15:3 tells us that our Lord says to His disciples, “Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.” We are told that God’s word acts as a pruning knife, in John 15:1-15; as a sword, Hebrews 4:12; as a fire, Jeremiah 23:29; and as water according to 1 Peter 1:22. Obviously, the laver is of great importance. We can understand now why there is a twice-repeated promise of death for non-compliance. The laver is a witness against formalism in religion. It tells us that we must be a new creation. Must be under God’s authority and in His spirit if we are to avoid presumption as we approach Him.
St. Paul, in Romans 2:29 declares, “He is a Jew [that is, a covenant man], who is one inwardly [that is, in all his being].” Now this was in direct contrast to all paganism. Mohammed deliberately attacked St. Paul at this point declaring “He is a Muslim is one outwardly.” In some forms of paganism, the gods or spirits can only discern man’s intentions by his actions. They cannot penetrate man’s mind. This is why paganism has been and still is so popular. A classic objection to the God of scripture which I have heard expressed with a triumphant belief by intellectuals who think they are being very witty is that the all-knowing God is a snoopy God, a kind of exalted peeping tom. Well, such attitudes should not surprise us. The God of the Bible negates the autonomy and privacy of man. There is no hiding place from Him. Moreover, we can only stand before Him on His terms, and by His cleansing and regenerating power.
Now, there is a kind of irony here, and a rather grim one. As men have sought privacy in relationship to God, they have cultivated a nakedness before men, very often a physical as well as a mental nakedness. The extent of soul-bearing autobiographies is startling, and very often, too unpleasant to read. When Louis XIV began the sun king, a kind of god on earth, it became a great honor to be present when he defecated and to be the keeper of the royal chamber pot. Well, the point is this: If the Lord is our God, we know that we are naked and open unto the eyes of Him with whom we have to do. Because He is our God, because He is our redeemer and our sustainer, we know His grace and mercy. He knows our needs before we are aware of them, and we can turn to Him for strength and help knowing that He knows our needs before we declare them. We are then private persons towards other people because they are neither our God nor our savior. If, however, as with humanism, man or man’s humanistic state is our god and savior, we will seek a saving openness in that direction. Christian confession is private in relationship to men. At the least, it is normally restricted to a priest or pastor, unless else against whom we have sinned and to whom we must make restitution, confession must be made to them. The humanistic bearing of body and soul is a form of public confession, a means of washing and regeneration which does not work. The laver tells us that our cleansing, our sanctification, our regeneration comes from God by way of His altar, the atonement, so that we stand, cleansed by God, not be soul-bearing in public.
An ironic fact is that the confession works in every direction, a boasting which creates envy. Someone wrote about a year ago how Malcom Forbes went out of his way in every context to make known to one and all, how wealthy he was, was ready to talk about it, knowing full well how it created envy, and yet, how can you deal with that? Both a public confessional, the public bearing of souls plus the problems it creates. Earlier this morning, Dorothy was reading to me a statement by Cicero, the jist of which was because the number of very wealthy people within Rome were limited, anyone publicizing the list, a very small one, of the very wealthy, should be executed because it would create envy and social disruption. Well, of course, it did, and had the list been banned, it still would not have changed anything, because neither the rich nor the poor were in right relationship to God, and both because those who had the wealth wanted to display it. That was their kind of public confession of how great they were, whereas, those who did not relished envy, and of course, Rome was destroyed in time by that.
Well, as we have seen, the proverb “Cleanliness is next to godliness,” comes out of the biblical insistence on moral and physical cleanliness. We can amend it to say also that full cleanliness comes out of godliness. As we approach God, we are of ourselves fallen creatures. Paul says that he knows that in his human nature as such, there is no good thing. He cannot stand before God in self-righteousness, but only by God’s grace. As a result, we can only approach God by His appointed way, by His cleansing, through His appointed laver or means, and by His grace. Let us pray.
Our Father, we give thanks for thy word, and we thank thee that we are in thy providence and mercy naked and open in thy sight, because thou art the only one who can cleanse us, forgive us, renew us, and make us, in all things, more and more clean in thy sight. Thy ways, O Lord, are indeed great and marvelous and we thank thee. In Christ’s name, amen. Are there any questions now, first of all, about our lesson? Yes?
[Audience] Do you have any idea {?} about the Black Death that people being scared about bathing?
[Rushdoony] Well, yes we do know because, at the time, all kinds of things were blamed for the Black Death, except the right things and, as a result, there was a belief on the part of many doctors, not the first nor the last of errors made by the medical profession because, like everybody else, they are fallible, concluded that bathing was responsible, and so the modern age was born with an antipathy to too much bathing as somehow bad for your health. Now, that did not mean that everyone practiced it, but it did mean that a sizable percentage of the people did. There were people who were very hostile to that. Louis XIV, for example, insisted on bathing twice daily, but predominantly the modern age has not been known for its cleanliness. Yes?
[Audience] Confessions apparently were public in the early Kirk under Knox, but faded away. Why did they fade away?
[Rushdoony] Well, in the early church, too, confessions were public. One of the reasons for the public confession was in the early church, the people came out of paganism. Then, in the Scottish Kirk, they came out of a background where the faith had been all but dead, so the sins and the offenses were very great, and public confession became especially salutatory in that it was a way of admitting before the entire congregation what you were. Now, as the Christian temper of the people was set, then unless the sin were against the entire congregation or involved other people, it became private and that became the standard as a result thereafter. Yes?
[Audience] It seems to me that that practice has pretty well diminished today. I don’t know whether that’s so or not, but I have that impression. And people who never confess never have to admit.
[Rushdoony] Very important point. Confession is waning in every communion now, unfortunately, and I do believe there should be a return to the fact. One of the problems with confession now is that whatever the form of confession, and there are varying forms still practiced: totally private, in some instances before a board of elders or a board of deacons, in other instances where the whole congregation is affected, or everyone at the place of work in their presence. But lawsuits are being encouraged by various agencies and are proliferating. In fact, I have been working off and on on a book on the subject of confession, because in one case which is not yet settled, my testimony has had to do with confession, and it is appalling to see what the courts are doing with it. Now, the relationship between a doctor and a patient is the same as that between a priest or pastor and a Christian, because health and the word “salvation” are related. Salvation means fullness of health, but that relationship between doctor and patient has been radically breeched by various federal decisions, so that it’s only a myth that the relationship is private. Good doctors try to maintain it as so, but the federal government reserves the right to intervene at any time. It is doing the same thing with religious confessions. Well, of course, what this means is that the state is claiming to be God. The whole basis of the doctor/patient, pastor/member relationship has been theological. It has been basically a confession to God, and the priest or the pastor, or the doctor is God’s agent in the healing restoration process. The state says, “We have replaced God.” This is, in effect, their position. So, any restoration in society belongs to us and to our courts, so we have the right now to intervene in that process at any point we choose, and to dictate the terms thereof.
And it is interesting in the case in which I am involved that, despite a long history of court decisions, the judge has seen fit to disregard all of them, and this is the new direction. What was done in the past represented a Christian hangover, even if it were only ten and twelve years ago. Everything must begin as of this moment. We, in effect, have abolished the past.
Someone told me of trying to check into research on a particular point, a scientific point, and found that nothing before 1980 was filed or classified, or indexed. It was no longer relevant. It was as though time just began, so no matter how valid something might have been previously, it was now considered passé, which could mean that people could duplicate what was once done and it would perhaps pass as new. So, we have a major revolution against God and against man’s relationship to Him. Yes?
[Audience] The courts have ruled that an IRS agent can impersonate a priest, and hear confessions.
[Rushdoony] Well, that tells you how far it has gone, and it’s logical. After all, they have been saying for some years when they give you an extension of time that it’s so many days of grace, and they are playing God, the federal government and all its divisions in one sphere after another. So why not play priest? It is interesting, a book that I just purchase and have not yet done more than browse in, says that in the American tradition, the transfer of priesthood from the church to the artist, especially to the writer, was made by Ralph Waldo Emerson. That, he saw a new clerisy and himself as the, probably the great high priest. Are there any other questions or comments? Yes?
[Audience] Several support group-type ministries, say Alcoholics Anonymous and so forth, they have a public confession as part of their therapy. Can you comment on the role of confession in those type of groups?
[Rushdoony] Yes. They have recognized that the only real help to an alcoholic has to be religious, so they have to recognized a power greater than themselves; God. They don’t get into theology, they allow the man, in terms of his own background to determine what his theological approach is, but he has to recognize a power greater than himself, and he has to be in a right relationship to that power. That requires a confession of what he is; cold sober. Alcoholics Anonymous will not deal with anyone who is still under the influence, because they know that a lot of them are ready to cry and be contrite, and confess with they are still under the influence, but when they sober up, they want to forget about it. They feel confident they can lick it, but when they are cold sober and have been sober for awhile, then they are ready to allow them to confess because they know the confession then will be valid, and then they will help as fellow sufferers in helping him through his crisis. Yes?
[Audience] It’s been misused, however, by some groups, such as Synanon in the Bay Area where they substituted a human being for God and created a guru situation.
[Rushdoony] Yes, a great many groups have taken the whole idea of confession to a group and abused it greatly, and sooner or later it has destroyed those groups, because it is an abuse of a power that belongs to God, and Synanon was one of the most highly touted groups imaginable. When they began in Santa Monica, some very prominent people there who opposed it were treated as though they were some kind of moral lepers for daring to criticize it, but in time, it was some of the liberals themselves who helped destroy Synanon because it got to be so far out of hand. That occurred here, in Northern California. Any other questions or comments? Well, if not, let us conclude with prayer.
Our Father, we thank thee that even the wrath of man shall praise thee, that all the evils of men shall redound to the destruction of those things they proclaim, and thy kingdom shall stand forth in all it righteousness. We thank thee that by thy grace, we are members of thy kingdom, that we are heirs of all things in heaven and on earth. Make us ever mindful of how rich we are in Christ. And now go in peace. God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost bless you and keep you, guide and protect you this day and always. Amen.
End of tape.