Jarrod, you said, "Elsewhere Scriptures plainly state that God hates the sacrifices, incense (Isa 1:13), and feasts, and even implies that God did not command them. (Isa 1:14)"
So what is the explanation for Exodus 3:18? With your extensive education in the Torah who commanded the sacrifices?
:cheers:
You are basically asking me the same question I originally posed. You know that, right?
Exodus 3:18 contains a shrewd bit of politics, in which Moses asks Pharoah to grant leave, knowing full well that he will not. It's a bit like the scene in Braveheart where Mel Gibson goes out to parlay before the battle, and one of the men asks him where he is going. "To pick a fight!"
No amount of proof-texts resolves the problem. The original problem here is that there are texts on both sides that disagree with each other.
The conflict can be solved in several ways.
1) We can interpret the priesthood as being something figurative, and not something to be carried out literally, as 1M1M has done, following Barnabas.
2) We can interpret the priesthood as being a punishment from God, rather than an expression of His desires, in which case God lifts the punishment in an act of mercy.
3) We can believe one group of texts and dismiss the other.
4) We can believe that God changed His Mind about atonement, or miscalculated the effects the priesthood would have.
I do not find #3 be a viable option. I opt to keep the whole Bible. The 4th option, which you seem to subscribe to, also falls short. God does not change, or make mistakes.
I have been, for some time now, inclined to believe #2. In the incident of the golden calf, Israel incurred God's anger, and would have been destroyed without Moses' intercession. The establishment of a priesthood to intercede for the people is a practical means of saving them from God, but also a punishment to Israel, who bore the load of supporting a professional clergy and supplying meat for an expensive cult center and liturgy.
I admit, though, that I find option 1 fascinating, and not at all far-fetched. This position has the support of many early scholars of the church, as Barnabas and Justin. If true, it also adds an element to Jesus condemnation of the 1st-century Jews for their mode of practicing the Law. That is, perhaps He wasn't just condemning their
additions to the liturgy, but also their literal practice of it, altogether.
#1 & #2 may be simultaneously true. God has a way of getting things to work together to make 1 action support multiple ends.
It is clear from a reading of the entire Old Testament, that the Levitical priesthood and associated law-keeping were not used
by the faithful, even before Jesus life and death. Both the patriarchs before Moses, and the prophets that came after him, uniformly practice justice apart from the law. They all condemn the sacrificial system, and the high holy days. What use do the righteous have for sacrifice? None at all.
It is only in the books of history where we see the unfaithful backsliding part of Israel - those condemned under the Law - carrying out the literal letter of the Levitical priests duties.
Finally, consider King David. He failed repeatedly at upholding justice. During his life, he was a murderer and an adulterer, a mercenary and a traitor. His unbelief brought war, plague and discord both on his army, his village, his tribe, and the whole country. But even David recognized the insufficiency of the Levitical priesthood, as he sought after the prophet of God (not the priests), approached God directly in matters of penitence and absolution, and even went so far as to both change the existing priesthood, and name himself a priest. He even sought to change the liturgy of the priestly cult.
It seems clear to me at least. The Levitical priesthood, including its attendant statutes and liturgy, is intended for punishment for those who do not seek to do what is just. It is a millstone that the wicked may choose of their own volition to push uphill, as Sisyphus, laboring to establish their righteousness by means other than faith, even as it points them elsewhere.
No-one was ever justified by the blood of lambs and doves, the intercession of the Levite was never effectual, and it was only those who lacked ears to hear who appropriated the punishment upon themselves.
The just were always just because of their faith, and only ever paid any heed to the spiritual application of the Law, not the literal practice of the Law's attendant priesthood.
Jarrod
