The Breastplate of Judgment vs the Breastplate of Righteousness

 

As I was reading through Exodus 28 today, I came across something that I know I’ve read before but, to my knowledge, I’ve never thought to question the significance of. Exodus 28:30 says the following:

And you will put the Urim and the Thummim on the breast piece of judgment, and they will be on the heart of Aaron when he comes before Yahweh, and Aaron will bear the judgment of the Israelites on his heart before Yahweh continually. (LEB)

Now, the Urim and Thummim are not really what we’re talking about here, but they’re worth mentioning because Keil & Delitzsch (K&D)[1] use their inclusion in their commentary on what the breastplate is. K&D posit that because the Urim and Thummim are included in this verse that the reason for naming the breast piece the “Breastplate of Judgment” is because the Urim and Thummim were used by the Lord for informing His people of His judgments. In this understanding the breast piece takes its name because it is an instrument of the judgment which the Urim and Thummim provided. While the idea of the Urim and the Thummim are certainly fertile ground for speculation, I would argue that there’s a different clue this verse which better speaks to the reasoning for this breast piece being referred to as the Breastplate of Judgment. If we look at the end of the verse we see that Aaron is going to be bearing the judgment of the Israelites. Looking at some of the other instances where the Hebrew word nasah (נשׂא) is used, I think we will get a better idea of why this breastplate may have gotten its name. It may be easier to use a different word than ‘bear’ to better express what the overall point is here so it’s probably worth saying that other places that nasah is used in the Bible it can also be translated as ‘carry’ or ‘lift up’. So we see that Aaron is said to be carrying the judgment of the people of Israel in this verse. What may clear things up a bit is if we knew if there were other times in Scripture that the High Priest carries/bears anything for Israel? There are a few other times where we can see things like this mentioned but, probably, the best example would be during the Day of Atonement. On this day, the High Priest makes atonement for the sins of the people of Israel. What he is doing on this day is taking on all the sins of Israel. This is what the High Priest does when he goes before the LORD; he is acting as a representative for the entire assembly of Israel, and he is carrying all their sins. Then, on the Day of Atonement specifically, the High Priest transfers all the sins of the people over to the goat sent out to Azazel[2]. Leviticus 16:22 says that the goat, “shall bear on itself all their iniquities” (emphasis added).[3] There’s still a good bit that happens after that (and quite a bit more which happens before this) but, for the most part, after the goat has been led out of the city, and has been given over to the wilderness, the sins of the people have been atoned for. The point of walking through that passage of Scripture is to show that priests (and High Priests, in particular) can carry judgment for the entire assembly of Israel.[4] So now we have a better understanding of what it might mean to “bear the judgment of the people of Israel,”[5] let’s take a look at the Breastplate of Righteousness mentioned in the book of Ephesians. The Breastplate of Righteousness (Eph 6:14) is much better known than is the Breastplate of Judgment but in all the times I have read through this passage I have never stopped to think about it and compare it to the High Priest’s breastplate. Probably the most common association that’s made for this breastplate is the breastplate of the Roman soldier, and then we are given some spiritual meaning having to do with your righteousness guarding your heart. And, just to be clear, it’s still entirely possible that’s the proper way to think about this. But I wanted to submit a new theory. A new way to think about the Breastplate of Righteousness… What if we’re supposed to envision ourselves carrying righteousness as we wear the breastplate? Except, we’re not the High Priest, Jesus is. And, much like how the High Priest would bear the sin of the people as he went before the LORD, and the people in turn carried the Name of the LORD out into the world around them, Jesus has carried our sin before the LORD and we’re now carrying His righteousness out into the world around us? This understanding would not only explain why Paul would bring it up as an amazing defense but it also adds a new context to it. Now, we must make sure that we’re representing the righteousness of Jesus appropriately. Are our actions misrepresenting the righteousness of our King? If this is the case, bearing the Breastplate of Righteousness bears (pun intended) the same responsibility that the third commandment carries. This presents one of the articles found in the “Armor of Salvation” in an different light than we’re used to looking at it, and the depth that’s added to it is so rewarding. And, just as a heads up, I have been working on a game changer for the Shield of Faith, too. What have you noticed that has changed the way you’ve looked at things you hadn’t given a second thought before?

[1] Delitzsch, Franz, and Carl Friedrich Keil. Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1857.

[2][2] Sklar, Jay. Leviticus: An Introduction and Commentary: Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries: Volume 3. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2014. P.212

[3] Lev 16:22, NKJV

[4] This same conversation has a great deal to do with the Name Command mentioned in Exodus 20:7. For a more thorough discussion on the Name Command please see Carmen Joy Ime’s work Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters.

[5] Exodus 28:30 ESV

The Importance of the Conversion of Paul

 

Recently I’ve heard it argued that the conversion of Paul was a false conversion because it resembles the experiences of Mohammed and Joseph Smith. Aside from this being a ridiculous argument because it could just as easily be argued that the experiences of Mohammed and Joseph Smith were modeled after the conversion experience of Paul, there is a profound purpose for the conversion experience of Paul happening the way that it did. I wanted to go into that profound purpose a little bit with you today.

The story of Paul’s conversion takes place in Acts 8-9. In the account we come to a place where Paul is traveling from Caesarea to Damascus. Presumably he would be traveling on the Kings road, which would have been the main road through the region which has been being used for centuries. At this time (and still today, really) people tended to use the same ways to get places. Trade routes have remained the same for thousands of years. Paul was on his way to Damascus (as a representative of the religious establishment of Israel) to bring curses and accusations against the followers of Jesus, and to bring persecution upon them. As Paul neared Damascus a bright light shone and either made Paul fall back and onto the ground or, if he was traveling on a horse, his horse would’ve reared up and made him fall off, onto the ground. Either way, there was something in the road which stopped him in his tracks.

What stopped Paul in his tracks? We’re told that Jesus, so bright and sunshiny that the traveling companions could hear Him but not see Him, was standing in the road before them, and He had an important word for Paul which would lead him to stop his accusations and persecution going forward (among other far greater changes in the life of Paul).

So, what’s the significance of this story, outside of the obvious, you might ask?

We have to remember that directly before the conversion story of Paul in Luke’s narrative (Acts 8-9) we’re walked through the history of Israel (courtesy of Stephen’s address before the Sanhedrin) where we’re told of Israel not recognizing their savior but then coming to their senses at a later time, over and and over again. We’re walked through a redemption narrative that spans almost the entirety of the 7th chapter of Acts. Remember, Luke is writing this book and making choices as he goes as to what to include and what to leave out. So what’s the significance of telling this narrative, directly after Stephen’s address on redemption and second opportunities?

Let me tell you a story of another guy who was traveling along the King’s road and would have been passing by Damascus on his way to Moab. This man had been asked to curse and persecute Israel and he really struggled over whether he wanted to be a part of it, or not, but eventually he decided that he would go see what he could do about persecuting Israel. Along the road from Pethor (the probable sight being about 250 miles north of Damascus) down to Moab this man had a supernatural encounter with the Angel of the LORD. I don’t really have the time of the space here to make the argument but it is viewed by the majority of Christian scholars that an appearance of the Angel of the LORD is an appearance of the preincarnate Christ. So, in this story we have a preincarnate Jesus stepping out in front of a man traveling along the King’s road, potentially near Damascus. The story goes on to tell us that the Angel of the LORD is stopping the traveler because He wants to stop him from his intended purpose of persecuting the people of the LORD. Our protagonist seems to heed the warning but goes on to curse the people of Israel the only way he can figure out how to.

This story, of course, is the story of Balaam when he traveled to Moab and cursed the Israelites (Numbers 22-24).

In light of this, should we view it as significant that right after Luke tells us of Stephen's address where he shows Israel’s reversals over their history, we have a story where a man who was meant to persecute the people of the LORD is traveling and meets a terrifying appearance of the Angel of the LORD who stops him from his intended purpose?

Of course we should!

Is it possible that Luke is using the story of Paul’s conversion as a living example of Stephen’s words in the chapters directly before?

If that's not what's going on here, that would be a pretty big coincidence...