both Old and New Testaments. In the New Testament the publican is represented as saying, "God be merciful" (or "propitiated") "to me a sinner." In the Old Testament Jacob is represented as saying, in view of his brother Esau's approach, "I will appease him with the present." In these passages the meaning of the word atonement is turning away wrath. In other passages it signifies cleansing away moral defilement. Its general signification, however, is that of covering over. Thus, "Blessed is he whose sin is covered" (Ps. xxxii. 1): "And thou shalt pitch it within and without with pitch." (Gen. vi. 14.) The same word which is here rendered to pitch" means also "to atone." Thus, as that ark was covered within and without, so the soul that looks to Jesus has all its sins covered for ever from the view of God.

There is one aspect of the sprinkling of the blood from these basins which is very solemn. When either a prièst or an Israelite had sinned, and thereby forfeited favour with God, the sprinkling of the blood was the only means of restoration. There was, however, a wide difference in this respect between the sin of the priest and the sin of the Israelite. The sin of the priest was of a much more serious nature than the sin of the Israelite, just as sin in a saint is far worse than sin in a sinner. If the reader will compare Lev. iii. 3-7, and also verse 9 with verses 27-31, he will see how great is the difference between the two sins. In the case of the priest, an offering of the highest value (a bullock) had to be offered. In the case of the common people it was only a "kid." In the case of the priest, the blood had to be sprinkled

"( seven times before the Lord before the veil," and to "put some of the blood on the horns of the altar of incense before the Lord." Access to God had been hindered by sin in one who ought to have warned others against it instead of committing it himself. The sin was thus of the deepest dye. Communion with God was hindered. Dishonour had been brought upon God's name by one who was set up as a witness for God. And nothing but the highest sense of the value of the blood could restore it. The blood had to be poured out at the foot of the brazen altar; in other words, the very foundation of his approach to God had to be laid again in the blood of atonement. Besides this, "the whole bullock" had to be "carried outside the camp unto a clean place, where the ashes are poured out," to be burned with fire; in other words, wrath against sin borne by the victim had again to be fully realized. Thus we learn how vastly greater is sin in one of God's children—the true priests of God—than in any one else. By the sprinkling of the blood seven times before the veil communion with God was restored; by blood being put on the horns of the altar of incense prayer and praise could again ascend to the Lord; and by the blood being poured out at the foot of the altar and the burning of the victim outside the camp, the relationship between the soul and God was set right at the very foundation.

The next of the vessels of the brazen altar demanding attention is the flesh-hook. This was used for arranging the pieces of the sacrifice on the wood when it was offered to the Lord. In 1 Sam. ii. 13-17 there is a remarkable reference to this vessel. The

flesh-hook, appointed by God to the end that the sacrifice should be burned as a sweet savour to Jehovah, was used by the sons of Eli for their own use-to feed themselves. Do not multitudes now do the same? Do they not use the name of Christ, and the doctrines of Christ, and the worship of Christ, to serve themselves? Is not Christianity a capital means for enabling many to "get on in the world"? Is not the flesh-hook, in these and a thousand other ways, used as the sons of Eli used it, for self instead of for God?

Let us now look for a moment at the last of the holy vessels connected with the brazen altar, namely, the "fire-pans or censers. This vessel was used in which to carry the burning coals from off the altar to the altar of incense in the tabernacle, whenever incense had to be offered there or in the most holy place. The fire that consumed the burnt offerings is specially marked as divine fire. (Lev. ix. 24.) Nadab and Abihu sinned a great sin when they offered "strange fire" before the Lord. That sin consisted in not taking the fire from the altar, but from some other source. The fire on the altar was sacrificial fire. Like Cain of old, and the Rationalists and Socinians of this day, they thought of presenting an acceptable offering to the Lord without the blood. They desired to worship on another basis than that of the blood of Jesus Christ. What was the result in their case? The fire of God must consume either the victim or the sinner. The fire taken from off the altar has consumed the victim, and the sinner is free. But if there be not the victim to consume-the sinner's sub

stitute-it must consume the sinner himself. In this case "fire came out from the Lord and devoured Nadab and Abihu." (Lev. x. I-2.) The incense and the censer are here the emblem of religion; but if it have not the blood as its basis, the consuming wrath of God must descend and devour the professor of that religion.

In Num. xvi. we have reference to the "censer." Korah, Dathan, and Abiram endeavoured to usurp the priest's office, though not divinely called. The result was the same-sudden destruction from the Lord. In each of these cases we have a very solemn warning. In the case of Nadab and Abihu, we see the sin of religion without the cross-Christianity without the blood of Christ. In the case of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, we see the sin of those drawing near to God to worship or to serve who are not true priests unto God-whose own hearts have never been changed; men who have themselves never yet "passed from death unto life." The warning is solemn. Sudden destruction from the Lord awaits both.

Reader, are you a true "priest unto God"? Have you "passed from death unto life"? And if so, is everything in your life resting on the blood of the Lamb?

CHAPTER VI.

THE LAVER.

THIS vessel was entirely of brass, and stood

between the brazen altar and the entrance to the tabernacle. It was made of the brazen mirrors used by the women assembling "at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation." Its use was solely for the priests. Before entering into the tabernacle to perform any of their priestly functions they were obliged, under pain of death, to wash their hands and feet daily.

None could be priests but those born into the priestly family. None can be priests unto God but those who are "born again." But those who would approach God must do so with clean hands. (Ps. xxiv. 2-4; xxvi. 6.) Any uncleanness in heart or conscience disqualifies the soul for communion with God or service for God. This must be removed. (1 John i. 6.) We cannot possibly go to the "golden altar" till we have been at the laver. Worship must be in holiness, and with a purged conscience. There is a close analogy between the brazen altar and the laver, in the washing in the bath and the washing of the feet, in the thirteenth of St. John's Gospel : "he that