EIGHT
Back to Gleanings on the Church
Outside the Camp
The question, however, may arise, What is signified by "the Camp" and how can this term cover in its significance the religious systems of Christendom so as to warrant us leaving them?
First, let us note that whatever the significance of the Camp it is something of which it is said that Christ is outside. Three times in the three verses of Hebrews 13:11-13 we have the word "without." In Heb 13:11 it is used in connection with the type, in Heb 13:12 in connection with the great antitype and in Heb 13:13 in its application to believers.
Under the law, the body of the sacrifice (sin offering) was burned without the Camp. In the Antitype, Jesus, that He might set apart His people from everything inconsistent with the holiness of God, suffered the judgment of sins in the place of forsaking. But to accomplish this great work He went outside the worldly religious system (Judaism) which in its beginning had been sanctioned by God, but in its history had become corrupted by man. This system is set before us under the figure of a Camp or a City; both figures presenting the same idea of an ordered religious system adapted to the natural man, but in different circumstances — in movement at one time and settled at another . But what, more precisely, is the Camp? The Camp represents a worldly religious system, originally set up of God, making its appeal to the natural man and composed of people outwardly in relationship with God. Turning to Hebrews 9: 1-10 we find a description of the Camp.
. It was marked by a worldly sanctuary with magnificent vessels and furniture (Heb 9:1, 2).
2. There was an inner shrine to this worldly sanctuary, veiled from the outer and known as "the Holiest of all" (Heb 9:3, 4).
3. In connection with this worldly sanctuary there existed an order of priests, distinct from the people, who devoted themselves to the service of the sanctuary and over whom there was a High Priest (Heb 9:6, 7)
4. There were the people (Heb 9:7) distinct from the priests and who had no direct part in the service of the sanctuary.
5. The system, as such, signified (while it lasted) that there was no direct access to God (Heb 9:8).
6. This worldly sanctuary with its priests and sacrifices, could not give a purged conscience.
7. There is one significant omission. There is no thought of any reproach connected with this worldly religious system. Such is the description of the Camp in its significant features as presented in the Word of God. But the Word also presents Christianity in all its beauty as the exact contrast to the Camp. The Christian Company is composed of a people, not in mere outward relationship with God by natural birth, but in vital relationship by new birth.
Instead of outward worship in magnificent buildings it introduces living worship in "spirit and truth." In place of a special class of priests distinct from the laity, all believers are priests with Christ their great High Priest. Moreover, Christianity carries with it the blessing of a purged conscience and direct access to God. Moreover, since it opens heaven to the simplest believer, it entails on earth the reproach of Christ.
Having before us the characteristic differences between the Jewish "camp" and the Christian company, we may easily test the great religious systems of men. Do these great universal, national or non-conformist systems of men bear the characteristics of the Camp or those of Christianity? Sadly, beyond all question, truth compels us to admit that they are framed after the pattern of the Camp. They have adopted a worldly sanctuary with its railed-off inner shrine; they have ordained a special class of priests under the direction of a supreme priest who stands between God and the people, with the result that these systems, as such, give no direct access to God and no purged conscience.
These systems recognize man in the flesh, appeal to man in the flesh and are so constituted as to embrace man in the flesh. Hence with them, there is no reproach. Are then such systems the Camp? Strictly they are not. In one sense they are worse than the Camp inasmuch as they are merely imitations framed after the pattern of the Camp, with certain Christian adjuncts. The Camp was in its inception set up by God, but these great systems have been originated by men, however sincere and pious they may have been. Hence if the exhortation to the Jewish believers was to go forth without the Camp, how much more incumbent it is upon the believer today to go forth outside that which is merely an imitation of the Camp.