“Perhaps he also thought you were Saruman,” said Gimli. “But you speak of him as if he was a friend. I thought Fangorn was dangerous.”
“Dangerous!” cried Gandalf. “And so am I. Very dangerous. More dangerous than anything you will ever meet unless you are brought alive before the seat of the Dark Lord. And Aragorn is dangerous, and Legolas is dangerous. You are beset with dangers, Gimli, son of Gloin, for you are dangerous yourself in your own fashion. Certainly the forest of Fangorn is perilous, not least to those who are too ready with their axes. And Fangorn himself, he is perilous too, yet he is wise and kindly nonetheless.”
“Aslan, a man,” said Mr. Beaver sternly, “certainly not. I tell you, he is the King of the wood and the son of the great Emperor-beyond-the-sea. Don’t you know he is the King of the Beasts? Aslan is a lion–the lion, the great lion.”
“Oh,” said Susan, “I thought he was a man. Is he quite safe? I shall feel rather nervous about meeting a lion.”
“That you will, dearie, but make no mistake,” said Mrs. Beaver. “If there’s anyone who can appear before Aslan without their knees knocking, they’re either braver than most or else just silly.”
“Then he isn’t safe?” said Lucy.
“Safe?” said Mr. Beaver. “Don’t you hear what Mrs. Beaver tells you? Who said anything about safe? ‘Course he isn’t safe. But he’s good. He’s the King, I tell you.”
I do not love the writings of Lewis and Tolkien because they were great theologians. They were not. Tolkien was Catholic, and Lewis was practically one (though he vehemently reminded his readers that he was not a theologian). No, I love Lewis and Tolkien because of their firm and biblical grasp of human nature and the nature of the world around us. They are also able to quietly point out flaws in our understanding of both.
We, for instance, almost always associate danger with evil. Yet these two friends both point out that someone can be dangerous while still being good and even kind.
We see this in the Gospels during the great storm that falls upon Jesus and His disciples while they are at sea. They are terrified of the storm, but Jesus calms the storm simply by speaking to it. Mark then tells us that they were more terrified of Jesus than they were of the storm. They began to understand that Jesus, who could command the storm, was clearly more dangerous than the storm itself.
We serve a dangerous God. The One who creates light with His word is not to be trifled with, nor is His presence to be entered frivolously and lightheartedly. Of course, that has been the main concern of Leviticus. How can God’s sinful people draw near to Him? And the answer has been through the sacrificial offerings.
Last week, the great tension of the first nine chapters was resolved. The tabernacle became also the tent of meeting when Moses and Aaron were finally able to enter it. Then fire came from the tent of meeting and consumed the burnt offering, displaying Yahweh’s acceptance of them and their gifts.
Chapter 10 now moves us into the next main tension of the book, which is how the tent of meeting can remain undefiled and pure.
WHICH HE HAD NOT COMMANDED // VERSES 1-3
Our text can divide easily into three sections: vv. 1-3, vv. 4-11, and vv. 12-20. We will spend a good portion of our time in the first three verses because they provide the inciting incident of the whole chapter. Indeed, I find it interesting that the event itself is so quickly described, while the rest of the chapter deals with the aftermath. Interestingly, I believe that the literary structure reflects reality. Sin always happens in a moment. We commit sin in a flash of rebellion and are left to deal with the consequences from then on. That is how this chapter flows. The sin occurs in verse 1, and the remainder of the chapter deals with the effects of that sin.
Verse 1 reads: Now Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, each took his censer and put fire in it and laid incense on it… Notice that all of this sounds great so far. These are all priestly actions that the sons of Aaron ought to be doing. But then we come to the last words of the verse: and they offered unauthorized fire before the LORD, which he had not commanded them.
Grammatically, it is important to note that these verses are a continuation of 9:22-24. Sklar notes:
These events occur the same day as those of ch. 9. Indeed, the original Hebrew had no chapter divisions, so the first hearers or readers would have joined the two chapters closely, especially since the verbal form that begins 10:1 carries on the story of 9:24. And while this verbal form allows for several hours to have passed between 9:24 and 10:1, the smooth transition gives the impression that the Israelites are still shouting for joy in the background as Nadab and Abihu begin their fatal deed. (293)
So we should picture this verse happening with everyone shouting for joy and bowing their faces to the ground in worship of Yahweh. While that is happening, Nadab and Abihu sin. But what is their sin exactly?
Three answers are fairly commonly proposed. First, it could be that they were drunk. But the only evidence for that suggestion is the presence of verses 8-11. Second, they could have used their own fire rather than taking it from the altar, as they ought to have done. Third, they could have been attempting to enter the Most Holy Place within the tabernacle.
The plain answer is that we do not know which, if any, of those suggestions is correct. If I were to pick, I would argue for the third, but we do not know for certain. And it is ultimately not very important. The only thing we must know is that they offered a fire which he had not commanded them. They disobeyed God.
Notice the contrast between this and the phrase that has recurred throughout chapters 8-9: “as the LORD commanded Moses.” Now, all of a sudden, Nadab and Abihu are doing what God has not commanded. And fire came out from before the LORD and consumed them.
Now, we should take care how we think of the sin of Nadab and Abihu because I do not think that their intentions were blatantly wicked. I do not think that they were actively trying to transgress against God’s holiness. Instead, I think that they were simply careless. They were presumptuous in coming before the LORD, and that was deadly for the priests. “Lest you die” is another phrase that was repeated throughout chapters 8-9, as well as back in Exodus 28-29. Being a priest of Yahweh was dangerous work. They were ministering in the presence of the Holy One. They had been sufficiently warned that they could die if they failed to come before God in holiness. Nadab and Abihu failed to take those warnings seriously. They did not guard their steps as they entered the house of God. They transgressed against the Holy One, and He consumed them.
Where Scripture clearly prescribes what should be done or directly prohibits what should not be done, there is no room for innovation and alteration. In many areas there is room for change and development or embellishment, but in essential things, like the fire on the altar, there is not. The fire of the LORD lit the altar for the required burning of offerings and incense. When it consumed the sacrifices, it signified that God was pleased to accept the sacrifice and thereby provide atonement and forgiveness because his wrath had been satisfied. It was from that fire that the incense was to be taken and burned, for the prayers were made on the basis of atonement. (234)
This leads us to two interconnected applications. First, the sin of Nadab and Abihu reminds us that we do not get to set the terms for what constitutes obedience. Indeed, every time we observe the Lord’s Supper, we go first to God’s law. We do not discern and confess our sin based upon our own subjective ideas of what is good and evil. No, God is the creator of all things, and He alone defines right and wrong.
Second, worship of God must be given on God’s terms, not ours. Nadab and Abihu did what God did not command. They offered worship that was right in their own eyes. But that is not worship. Worship is about God, not us. Worship is drawing near to God, coming into His presence to see a glimpse of His glory, how good and great He is. We must always ask: are we coming to God on His terms? If not, it is not worship. Nadab and Abihu failed to do that, and they were consumed. Again, we serve a dangerous God.
Now, verse 3 begins dealing with the aftermath of this sin and death. Then Moses said to Aaron, “This is what the LORD has said: Among those who are near me, I will be sanctified, and before all people, I will be glorified.” And Aaron held his peace.
This is a poetic couplet, which is common to Hebrew poetry. The two lines parallel with one another. Notice that God will be glorified by all people, whether through worship or judgment. God’s glory is displayed in judgment just as much as in his acceptance of the atonement from chapter 9. Gordon Wenham says that Moses words may be loosely paraphrased as: “The closer a man is to God, the more attention he must pay to holiness and the glory of God.”
This is true in two realms. First, it is true for all believers. All Christians have heard the voice of God in His Word and have come near to him through Christ. Therefore, ours is the greater judgment if we then turn back to our sin and reject Christ. That was overall message of Hebrews. Jewish Christians were thinking of reverting back to Judaism to avoid persecution, but the author warned them that a greater judgment would be given to those with a greater knowledge of the truth.
Second, it is true of leaders specifically. James plainly tells us that not many should presume to be teachers because those who teach will receive greater judgment. As we will see in verse 11, the priests were called to be teachers as well. Paul Washer often mentions a wonderful tract called “Others May, You Cannot,” and it is a wonderful example of this principle. Here is the second to the last paragraph:
The Holy Spirit will rebuke you for little words or deeds or even feelings, or for wasting your time, which other Christians never seem to be concerned about, but you must make up your mind that God is an infinite Sovereign and He has a right to do whatever He pleases with His own. He may not explain to you a thousand things which puzzle your reason in the way He deals with you, but if you will just submit yourself to Him in all things, He will wrap you up in a jealous love and bestow upon you many blessing which come only to those who are very near to His heart.
More is expected from those to whom more has been given.
Notice that verse 3 ends with Aaron holding his peace. Aaron’s silence shows that he accepts God’s judgment as good and just. How difficult must that have been? Even though Aaron was in his eighties, which would have put his sons at being in their fifties or sixties, they were still his sons. Aaron saw his sons die before his eyes, but he knew that they had transgressed God’s holiness in some way. God was good to act on His warning. Aaron accepts God’s judgment with a closed mouth.
LEST YOU DIE // VERSES 4-11
Now verses 4-11 give us further instructions to the priests, likely with the aim of preventing another such episode of sin. In verse 4-7, Moses commands Aaron’s nephews to carry their cousins in their priestly coats outside the camp. This is a terrifying picture because the parts of the animals that were unusable were burned outside the camp. Nadab and Abihu are being given the same treatment because their disobedience rendered them unusable to God and His people.
Moses then commands Aaron and his surviving sons, Eleazar and Ithamar, from engaging in mourning rites. This was to display their total consecration to God. Aaron literally had “Holy to the LORD” on his turban as a reminder that he belonged to God.
Now it is worth noting what Sklar points out:
Note, however, that by forbidding these actions, Moses is not saying, “Don’t be sad!”—as though Aaron and his sons could not grieve their tragic loss. Rather, he is commanding, “Don’t engage in specific mourning rites that will make you ritually impure!” He is forbidding certain actions, not certain emotions.
He has not forbidden Aaron to be sad, but only from becoming impure through the mourning rituals. If they were in an impure state, they could not minister in the tabernacle, and they were still in the process of being ordained. If they became impure in the middle of the process, they would likely die as well, as the repeated phrase indicates: lest they die.
Sklar also makes the point that leaving the ordination process at this point would have been like a bride or groom throwing off their ring and stomping on it right before the minister pronounces them to be man and wife. They must keep going with the process or face death.
Verses 8-11 are fascinating, and few know exactly why they are placed here. They forbid the priests to drink alcohol while serving in the tabernacle. Presumably, they could drink at other times, and wine is consistently a positive image in Scripture. Why then were they forbidden from drinking while mediating?
They were teachers of the people, and when they were in their official role, they needed to be above reproach. They were teachers in word and deed. Word because they taught people what God’s law meant, and deed because they were to model obedience to God’s law before the people. Even a little alcohol could compromise their clarity to perform that task.
Of course, this parallels with elders today. The qualifications listed in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 calls elders to be above reproach, to be sober-minded, and to avoid drunkenness. This is also because elders teach God’s people. Elders must be able to teach in word, certainly. But the reason that elder is used more than the two other titles, overseer and pastor, is because elders are meant to model maturity and godliness before their congregation.
Notice that in verse 10 the priests must be able to distinguish between the holy and the common, between the clean and the unclean. As we will discuss in the next two weeks, common, unclean, and even impure do not necessarily mean sinful. But commonness, uncleanness, and impurity are caused by the effects of sin, thus if they come into the presence of God, they become sinful. So, they must be dealt with. Commonness must be consecrated. Uncleanness must be cleansed. Impurity must be purged. Nadab and Abihu failed to do this. They failed to distinguish between the common and the holy, between the unclean and the clean. They transgressed God’s holiness, and they died.
I think this phrase is so important because, as Morales argues, it signals the next tension of Leviticus: “Leviticus 10 creates a new tension that will be resolved by 11-16, culminating in the Day of Atonement.” Indeed, just as the big tension for the first nine chapters was how can the tabernacle also become the tent of meeting, where God’s people can dwell with Him? But now the sin of Nadab and Abihu creates another tension: what happens when the tent of meeting becomes polluted? How can the tabernacle remain the tent of meeting in spite of our sin?
WOULD THE LORD HAVE APPROVED? // VERSES 12-20
Indeed, that question takes us into our final section, which addresses the immediate elephant in the room: is the whole priesthood ruined now?
of course, we already know that that is not the case. Back in verse 8, Yahweh spoke directly and only to Aaron for the only time in Leviticus. I am certain that hearing the voice of the LORD was a great assurance to Him that he was doing the right thing and that he was still the high priest.
In verse 12-15, we should not get lost in the details of the offerings. The point is God’s continued provision for the priests. The sin of Nadab and Abihu did not void Aaron, Eleazar, and Ithamar’s “due forever.” God established the priesthood, knowing that even the priests were sinners, so this sin did not fundamentally alter God’s plan. God will still make atonement for His people. Aaron will still serve as priest. Praise God that His plans are not thwarted by the sins of man!
Verses 16-20 conclude with a great but difficult to understand portrait. To begin, Moses is utterly disturbed to find Aaron and his sons disobeying God’s command regarding the purification (or sin) offering. If you remember, back in chapter 4, there were two main procedures for the purification offering. If it was for a priest or the whole congregation, the blood needed to be taken in the tabernacle, and the animal could not be eaten. But if it was for a leader or ordinary Israelite, the blood was applied to altar, and the priests ate a portion.
With this particular purification offering, the blood was applied to the altar, not taken into the tabernacle, which meant that the priests ought to have eaten the meat. But Aaron did not do so. Thus, Moses is clearly afraid that God’s judgment is going to fall again because of Aaron’s disobedience.
But Aaron has a valid excuse: But Aaron said to Moses, “Behold, today they have offered their sin offering and their burnt offerings before the LORD, and yet such things have happened to me. If I had eaten this sin offering today, would the LORD have approved?”
I believe that is an open-ended question. Aaron wasn’t certain if God would still approve of their eating from the offering after what had just happened among them. This is what differentiates Aaron from Nadab and Abihu. Their sin was presumptuous and careless. They had no fear of Yahweh. Aaron is clearly displaying a fear of God. He decided not to eat because he felt that it wasn’t right then and there. Aaron used his own good judgment to essentially say, “No, it’s not right for me to eat this now. I know what the law says. I know I am supposed to eat of this. But this isn’t the time. This isn’t the circumstance.”
Moses was zealous for the letter of the law, which Nadab and Abihu broke. But Aaron here is upholding the spirit of the law. He is disobeying the exact letter of the law, but he is upholding the holiness of God. He is sanctifying God, and therefore, glorifying God among all the people.
That’s the key. Nadab and Abihu transgressed the holiness of God, but Aaron revered it.
Aaron makes this judgment as the high priest, and Moses approves. Thus, at the beginning of the chapter the whole priesthood is called into question, but by the end, God uses this sinful event to further confirm Aaron, even to have him vindicated before Moses. The high priesthood of Aaron is secure.
SALVATION THROUGH JUDGMENT
Now that we have looked at the parts, let us step back and view the whole. Did you notice the parallels between the beginning of 10 and the end of 9. Just as fire consumed the burnt offering and signaled the LORD’s approval, so fire now consumed the priests and signaled God’s judgment. But really in both cases, the fire signified judgment. The fire in chapter 9 that consumed the burnt offering was still a fire of judgment, but it graciously fell upon the offering rather than the people. It was a sign that atonement had been made, that God’s wrath had been satisfied. With Nadab and Abihu the fire fell squarely upon them.
This is a vivid picture of Romans 6:23, “For the wages of sin is death…” Because we sin, we deserve death. If God were to act purely upon His justice and righteousness, He would consume us all. We deserve nothing but the fire of His wrath. But God is not only righteous and just; He is also loving, merciful, gracious, and forgiving. He makes atonement because He cannot ignore our sin; it must be judged. But in His loving-kindness, He allows His judgment to fall upon Another.
The only reason that we can come into God’s presence today is through Christ, upon Whom the judgment of God fell upon completely. As one hymn rightly sings, “and he stood before the wrath of God, shielding sinners with His blood.” Christ has shielded us from the fiery judgment of God, and we are free to enter God’s presence in Him.
Even still, we serve a dangerous God, who is the same, yesterday, today, and forever. If Nadab and Abihu were guilty of transgressing God’s holy place, as we come to the Table before us, we should consider the warnings of sickness and even death that Paul gives toward those who transgress against Christ’s body and blood through unworthily partaking.
And we should deem ourselves unworthy to partake of this bread and cup. If we are honest with ourselves, we are no less sinful than Nadab and Abihu. Indeed, Aaron’s attitude at the end of chapter seems to show that he knew his own unworthiness. How could he have not thought back upon the golden calf, wondering why the LORD did not strike him dead there. But again Aaron seemed to understand his unworthiness, while Nadab and Abihu seemed to presume their worthiness.
But that is one of the many paradoxes of Christianity. Those who believe they are worthy of God’s grace do not have the humility to truly receive, while those who know they are unworthy of even the smallest of God’s mercies, joyfully give all glory for their salvation and security to God. It truly is as the hymn says: “Let not conscience make you linger, nor of fitness fondly dream; all the fitness he requireth is to feel your need of Him.” Recognizing our need of Christ is what makes us fit to partake of the Lord’s Supper. Let us eat and drink then fully acknowledging our need of Christ to save.
B. C. Newton 